Self Study Report 2006-2007 - Reaccreditation 2008

Transcription

UNIVERSITY OF IOWA COLLEGE OF LAW
SELF STUDY REPORT
2006-2007
Prepared by the Self Study Committee
Faculty and Staff:
Adrien Wing (Chair)
John Allen
Randall Bezanson
Arthur Bonfield
Jean Love
Linda McGuire
Mary Ann Nelson
John Reitz
Gerald Wetlaufer
Eric Andersen (ex officio)
Kirk Corey (ex officio)
Carolyn Jones (ex officio)
Students:
Daniel Dvorak
Kenneth Fukuda
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................... 11
SUMMARY OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................17
CHAPTER 2: PROGRAM OF LEGAL EDUCATION ....................................................................21
CHAPTER 3: FACULTY ............................................................................................................90
CHAPTER 4: STUDENT LIFE..................................................................................................153
CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATION ............................................................................................230
CHAPTER 6: LAW LIBRARY ..................................................................................................240
CHAPTER 7: TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES .............................................................................277
CHAPTER 8: FACILITIES .......................................................................................................279
CHAPTER 9: LAW SCHOOL FINANCES AND UNIVERSITY SUPPORT ....................................284
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ 11
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 17
A. Overview .......................................................................................................................... 17
B. Self Study and Strategic Planning Process ................................................................... 19
CHAPTER TWO: PROGRAM OF LEGAL EDUCATION ................................................. 21
A. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 21
B. Requirements for J.D. Degree, Academic Year, Quantity and Periods of Academic
Instruction ....................................................................................................................... 23
1. Basic ABA Requirements for Amount and Timing of Program of Education ............. 23
2. Enforcement of ABA Rules for Students...................................................................... 24
C. First Year Curriculum and First Year Legal Analysis, Writing, and Research
Instruction ....................................................................................................................... 25
D. Upper Level Curriculum ................................................................................................ 28
1. Classroom Courses and Seminars ................................................................................. 29
a. Seminars.................................................................................................................... 30
b. The Issue of Small Size Classes................................................................................ 30
2. Co-curriculars and the Issue of Teaching by Permanent Faculty ................................. 31
3. Information and Counseling about the Curriculum; Registration for Courses ............. 32
4. Concentration Areas within Curriculum and Special Strengths of Iowa Curriculum .. 33
5. Professional Responsibility Instruction ........................................................................ 33
6. Areas of ABA Concern That Are Not Present in Iowa Curriculum ............................. 34
E. Special Strength of Iowa Curriculum: The International and Comparative Law
Program (ICLP) ............................................................................................................. 34
1. Faculty, Administrative, and Library Resources .......................................................... 35
2. Curriculum .................................................................................................................... 37
3. Study Abroad ................................................................................................................ 40
4. Student Research and Writing Opportunities in ICLP .................................................. 40
5. Human Rights Externships ........................................................................................... 41
6. Ukrainian Initiative ....................................................................................................... 41
7. LL.M. Degree Program ................................................................................................. 41
8. ICLP Summary Data ..................................................................................................... 42
F. Special Strength of Iowa Curriculum: The Innovation, Business & Law Program 43
1. Intellectual Property & Competition Law Focus Area ................................................. 43
2. Corporate and Securities Law Focus Area.................................................................... 44
G. Upper Level Legal Analysis, Writing, and Research................................................... 45
1. Faculty-Supervised Writing Experiences ..................................................................... 45
2. Academic and Writing Credit in Student-Run Organizations ...................................... 48
a. Journals ..................................................................................................................... 48
b. Moot Court ................................................................................................................ 49
H. Writing Resource Center ............................................................................................... 50
I. Professional Skills Instruction ....................................................................................... 52
1. Clinical Programs.......................................................................................................... 52
a. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 52
b. Eligibility for Clinic .................................................................................................. 52
3
c. The Selection Process ............................................................................................... 53
d. In-House Clinic ......................................................................................................... 54
1. The Law Firm ........................................................................................................ 54
2. Infrastructure and Support ................................................................................... 55
e. Externships................................................................................................................ 57
f. Classroom Component .............................................................................................. 58
g. The Clinical Faculty.................................................................................................. 58
2. Skills Training Outside the Clinic................................................................................. 61
a. Mandatory Skills Component: Appellate Advocacy ................................................ 62
b. Courses Primarily Devoted to Skills Training, Taught by Faculty (including
Adjuncts) and Open to All Students ............................................................................ 63
c. Courses Primarily Devoted to Skills Training, Taught by Faculty, and Open to
Students on the Basis of Student-Run Competition ..................................................... 63
d. Skills Teaching through Student-Run, Faculty-Supervised Co-Curricular
Activities ...................................................................................................................... 63
e. Courses Devoted to Skills Training, Taught by Faculty, and Involving Very
Significant Drafting...................................................................................................... 66
f. Other Courses Taught by Faculty and including Some Measure of Drafting or
Problem-Based Negotiations........................................................................................ 66
g. Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 67
J. Externship Programs ...................................................................................................... 67
K. Accelerated Program and Summer Sessions ................................................................ 69
1. Accelerated Program..................................................................................................... 69
2. Summer Sessions .......................................................................................................... 71
L. Pro Bono Opportunities ................................................................................................. 73
M. Evaluation of Scholastic Achievement .......................................................................... 73
N. Studies in Foreign Countries.......................................................................................... 76
1. Summer Study in Arcachon, France ............................................................................. 76
2. London Law Consortium .............................................................................................. 76
3. The Bucerius Exchange Program.................................................................................. 76
O. Degrees in Addition to the J.D.: The LL.M. Degree in International and
Comparative Law ........................................................................................................... 77
1. Brief Description of Program........................................................................................ 77
2. Concerns, Comments, and Issues.................................................................................. 80
a. Meeting Program Goals ............................................................................................ 80
b. Writing Instruction for LL.M.s ................................................................................. 81
c. Adequacy of Other Resources .................................................................................. 81
d. Financial Aid ............................................................................................................. 81
e. Declining Applications and Enrollments and the Issue of Advertising .................... 82
f. Administrator for ICLP and Office for LL.M.s and Other Parts of ICLP ................ 83
CHAPTER THREE: FACULTY .............................................................................................. 90
A. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 90
B. Faculty Responsibilities ................................................................................................. 99
C. Teaching ........................................................................................................................... 99
1. Evaluation ..................................................................................................................... 99
4
2. Teaching Assignments ................................................................................................ 105
3. Work Load Distribution .............................................................................................. 106
D. Scholarship .................................................................................................................... 113
1. Overview and Commentary ........................................................................................ 113
2. Law Review Articles................................................................................................... 115
3. Books and Monographs .............................................................................................. 116
4. Chapters in Books ....................................................................................................... 116
5. Treatises and Hornbooks............................................................................................. 116
6. Casebooks ................................................................................................................... 117
7. Government Reports ................................................................................................... 117
8. Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 117
E. Interdisciplinary Activities and Centers...................................................................... 117
1. Interdisciplinary Activities .......................................................................................... 117
2. Centers ......................................................................................................................... 118
F. Service ............................................................................................................................ 129
G. Balance of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service .......................................................... 133
H. Promotion, Tenure and Clinical Career Status ......................................................... 136
1. Annual Review............................................................................................................ 137
2. Promotion and Tenure................................................................................................. 137
3. Clinical Faculty Status ................................................................................................ 138
4. Peer Review ................................................................................................................ 139
I. Faculty Support............................................................................................................. 139
1. Administrative and Secretarial Support ...................................................................... 139
2. Financial Support ........................................................................................................ 140
3. Developmental Leaves; Faculty Scholars Program; PTEAP ...................................... 141
J. Intellectual Enrichment Programs .............................................................................. 141
1. Judges and Practitioners in Residence ........................................................................ 142
2. Special Lectures .......................................................................................................... 142
3. Workshops .................................................................................................................. 144
4. Visiting Faculty, Adjunct Faculty, and Joint Appointments....................................... 147
K. Faculty Fellows Program ............................................................................................. 150
L. Governance .................................................................................................................... 151
CHAPTER FOUR: STUDENT LIFE .................................................................................... 153
A. Admissions ..................................................................................................................... 153
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 153
2. Applicant Pools and Enrolled Classes (2004, 2005, 2006) ......................................... 153
3. Admissions and Financial Aid Staff ........................................................................... 157
4. Admissions Process .................................................................................................... 158
a. Admissions Criteria ................................................................................................ 158
b. The Admissions Committee.................................................................................... 158
c. Process for Admitting Entry-Level Applicants....................................................... 158
d. College of Law‟s Strategic Plan 2006-2010 ........................................................... 162
5. Readmission and Transfer of Students ....................................................................... 162
B. Financial Aid ................................................................................................................. 162
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 162
5
C.
D.
2. Financial Aid at the College of Law ........................................................................... 162
a. Non-loan Based Financial Aid ................................................................................ 164
b. Loans ....................................................................................................................... 168
c. Stipends and Tuition Remissions ............................................................................ 171
d. Financial Aid Summaries and Conclusion .............................................................. 173
Student Services ............................................................................................................ 192
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 192
2. Student Activities and Student Life ............................................................................ 192
3. Student Focus Groups ................................................................................................. 193
4. Student Participation in Governance .......................................................................... 194
a. Faculty Committees ................................................................................................ 194
b. Student Government ............................................................................................... 194
c. Student Leader Meetings ........................................................................................ 195
d. Ombudspersons ....................................................................................................... 195
5. Student Advising and Mentoring ................................................................................ 195
a. Faculty Advising ..................................................................................................... 195
b. New Position: Career Advisor and Judicial Clerkship Coordinator ....................... 196
c. Other Academic Advising....................................................................................... 197
d. Peer Mentoring Program ......................................................................................... 198
e. Future Academic Advising ..................................................................................... 198
1. Student Survey ..................................................................................................... 198
2. Student Services Committee ................................................................................ 200
f. Bar Admission ........................................................................................................ 200
6. Orientation Program.................................................................................................... 200
7. Retention ..................................................................................................................... 202
8. Academic Achievement Program ............................................................................... 203
a. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 203
b. Development and Overview of the Academic Achievement Program ................... 203
1. Group Programming ........................................................................................... 203
2. Spring-term Small Group.................................................................................... 205
3. Individual Work with Students ............................................................................ 205
4. Outreach to Current and Prospective Students .................................................. 206
5. Collaboration with Faculty.................................................................................. 206
c. Current Status and Future of the Program .............................................................. 206
1. Current Status ..................................................................................................... 206
2. Future of the Program ........................................................................................ 207
9. Student Discipline ....................................................................................................... 207
a. Academic Misconduct ............................................................................................ 208
b. Non-academic Misconduct ..................................................................................... 208
c. Summary of All Misconduct Cases 1999-2005 ...................................................... 209
Career Services/Placement/Outputs............................................................................ 209
1. Accomplishments 2005-06 ......................................................................................... 209
2. Outcomes .................................................................................................................... 210
a. Bar Passage ............................................................................................................. 210
b. Graduation with Distinction.................................................................................... 212
6
c. Job Placement, Salary, Types of Employment ....................................................... 212
3. Career Services Operation .......................................................................................... 214
a. Consultant‟s Review ............................................................................................... 214
b. Assistant Dean Position Created ............................................................................. 215
c. Other Staffing and Physical Facility ....................................................................... 215
d. Job Search Support ................................................................................................. 216
1. On Campus Interviewing .................................................................................... 216
2. Resume Collections and Referrals ...................................................................... 218
3. Job Fairs ............................................................................................................. 218
4. Judicial Clerkships.............................................................................................. 219
e. Counseling .............................................................................................................. 219
f. Programming........................................................................................................... 219
1. Partner for a day................................................................................................. 219
2. Speakers .............................................................................................................. 220
g. Strategies for 2006-07 ............................................................................................. 220
E. Promoting Opportunities for Racial and Ethnic Minorities ..................................... 221
F. Pro Bono Opportunities ............................................................................................... 224
CHAPTER FIVE: ADMINISTRATION ............................................................................... 230
A. Administration .............................................................................................................. 230
B. Continuing Legal Education .......................................................................................... 238
1. Rationale ...................................................................................................................... 238
2. History of CLE at Iowa ............................................................................................... 238
3. CLE Program 2000-2006............................................................................................. 238
CHAPTER SIX: LAW LIBRARY .......................................................................................... 240
A. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 240
B. Mission ........................................................................................................................... 241
C. Assumptions of Law Library Self Study..................................................................... 241
D. Information Resources ................................................................................................. 242
E. Educational Program and Service Activities .............................................................. 255
F. Physical Facilities .......................................................................................................... 259
G. Computing Facilities and Services .............................................................................. 264
H. Personnel........................................................................................................................ 266
I. Administration and Budget .......................................................................................... 269
J. Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 274
CHAPTER SEVEN: TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES .......................................................... 277
CHAPTER EIGHT: FACILITIES ......................................................................................... 279
A. Adequacy of Facilities ................................................................................................... 279
B. Student Commons ......................................................................................................... 280
C. Classroom and Seminar Space .................................................................................... 280
D. Professional Skills Program Space .............................................................................. 280
E. Faculty Space................................................................................................................. 281
F. Co-Curricular and Student Organization Activity Space ......................................... 281
G. Administrative Services Space ..................................................................................... 281
H. Law Library Facilities .................................................................................................. 282
I. Research and Study Space ........................................................................................... 282
7
J. Control and Use of Law School Facilities ................................................................... 282
K. Current Planning and Development ........................................................................... 282
CHAPTER NINE: LAW SCHOOL FINANCES AND UNIVERSITY SUPPORT ........... 284
A. Budget and Finance ........................................................................................................ 284
B. Iowa Law School Foundation...................................................................................... 285
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2-1
Attachment 4-1
Attachment 4-2
Attachment 4-3
Attachment 4-4
Attachment 4-5
Attachment 4-6
Attachment 4-7
Attachment 4-8
LIST OF SUMMER COURSES 2001-05
FINANCIAL AID SUMMARY FISCAL YEAR 1998-99
ANNUAL LETTER FROM THE ADMISSIONS OFFICE TO THE DEAN
2006
FINANCING YOUR LEGAL EDUCATION 2007-08
THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA COLLEGE OF LAW PUBLIC INTEREST
LAW PROGRAMS
STUDENT FOCUS GROUP NOTES, SPRING 2006
STUDENT SERVICES COMMITTEE REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION FOR CONTINUATION OF THE ACDEMIC
ACHIEVEMENT PROGRAM 2006
TABLES
TABLE 2-1
TABLE 2-2
TABLE 2-3
TABLE 2-4
TABLE 2-5
TABLE 2-6
TABLE 2-7
TABLE 2-8
TABLE 2-9
TABLE 2-10
TABLE 2-11
TABLE 2-12
TABLE 2-13
TABLE 2-14
TABLE 3-1
TABLE 3-2
FIRST-YEAR CURRICULA 2005-06/2006-07
SUMMARY OF UPPER-CLASS CREDIT HOURS EARNED 2005-06
SUMMARY OF UPPER-CLASS CREDIT HOURS EARNED 2004-05
ICLP SUMMARY DATA 1998-2005
MAY 2006 GRADUATES – EARNED WRITING CREDITS
PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS BY GRADUATING CLASS TUTORED IN
THE WRITING CENTER DURING THEIR LAW SCHOOL YEARS 2000-06
PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS BY CLASS TUTORED IN THE WRITING
CENTER 1999-2006
NUMBER OF TUTORING SESSIONS IN THE WRITING CENTER 1999-2006
CLINICAL LAW PROGRAM LOTTERY SIGN-UP 2003-06
INFORMATION ON CLINICAL LAW PROGRAM 2003-06
NON-CLINICAL EXTERNSHIPS 1998-2005
CURRICULUM FOR MAY 2006 ENTRANTS
THE LL.M. PROGRAM SINCE THE LAST SELF STUDY 1998-2005
DISTRIBUTION OF LL.M. STUDENTS IN J.D. CLASSES 2005-06
DISTRIBUTION AMONG RANK AND POSITIONS BY GENDER, AND BY
RACE AND ETHNICITY 1999
DISTRIBUTION AMONG RANK AND POSITIONS BY GENDER, AND BY
RACE AND ETHNICITY 2006
8
TABLE 3-3
TABLE 3-4
TABLE 3-5
TABLE 3-6
TABLE 3-7
TABLE 3-8
TABLE 3-9
TABLE 3-10
TABLE 3-11
TABLE 4-1
TABLE 4-2
TABLE 4-3
TABLE 4-4
TABLE 4-5
TABLE 4-6
TABLE 4-7
TABLE 4-8
TABLE 4-9
TABLE 4-10
TABLE 4-11
TABLE 4-12
TABLE 4-13
TABLE 4-14
TABLE 4-15
TABLE 4-16
TABLE 4-17
TABLE 4-18
TABLE 4-19
TABLE 4-20
TABLE 4-21
TABLE 4-22
TABLE 4-23
TABLE 4-24
TABLE 5-1
TABLE 6-1
TABLE 6-2
NUMBER AND PERCENT OF MINORITIES AT COMPARABLE SCHOOLS
2005-2006
NUMBER AND PERCENT OF MINORITIES AT COMPARABLE SCHOOLS
1998-99
TEACHING EVALUATION DATA 2005-06
FORMAL TEACHING LOAD OF FACULTY MEMBERS 2005-06
TEACHING LOAD (Excl. Visitors) 2002-06
SCHOLARSHIP PUBLISHED BY IOWA FACULTY 1998-2006
NAMED AND ENDOWED LECTURES 2000-06
FACULTY SEMINARS 2006-07
TEACHING BY VISITORS AND ADJUNCTS
2005-06
APPLICANT POOLS OF 1992, 1998, 2004, 2005, 2006
NATIONAL APPLICANT POOL OF 2005
UI COLLEGE OF LAW ENROLLED CLASSES OF 1992, 1998, 2004, 2005,
2006
TUITION RATES FOR 1992, 1998, 2004, 2005, 2006
TOTAL COST OF EDUCATION FOR 1998 AND 2004, 2005, 2006
DESCRIPTION OF SCHOLARSHIPS AND GRANTS AVAILABLE IN
2004-05 AND 2005-06
SUMMARY REPORT OF RECRUITING OFFERS & YIELD RATES
1994 ENTRANTS TO 2006 ENTRANTS
ALLOCATION OF NEED-BASED AND MERIT-BASED SCHOLARSHIPS,
FELLOWSHIPS AND GRANTS AVAILABLE IN 1998-99, 2004-05, AND
2005-06
DISTRIBUTION OF SCHOLARSHIPS AND GRANTS IN 1998-99, 2004-05,
2005-06
AVERAGE LAW SCHOOL STUDENT LOAN DEBT 1993-94 THROUGH
2005-06
STUDENTS‟ RETENTION STATUS 1992-2006
MISCONDUCT CASES 1999-2005
IOWA BAR EXAM PASS RATES 2000-05
ILLINOIS BAR EXAM PASS RATES 2004-06
GRADUATION WITH HONORS 2001-06
EMPLOYMENT STATISTICS 1999-2005
SALARY DATA 1999-2005
TYPES OF EMPLOYMENT 1999-2005
PERCENTAGE EMPLOYED IN-STATE/OUT OF STATE 1999-2005
ON CAMPUS INTERVIEWING ACTIVITY 1999-2005
OCI AS JOB SOURCE (Fall only) 1999-2005
CLERKSHIPS CLASSES 2000-05
PARTNER FOR A DAY 1999-2006
CAREER SERVICES PROGRAMMING 1999-2005
COLLEGE OF LAW TABLE OF ORGANIZATION
ABA/AALS LIBRARY STATISTICS JUNE 30, 2005
ABA/AALS LIBRARY STATISTICS TOTAL MONEY SPENT JUNE 30,
9
TABLE 6-3
2005
LAW LIBRARY TABLE OF ORGANIZATION
APPENDICES in separate volumes
Appendix 1-1
Appendix 1-2
Appendix 2-1
Appendix 2-2
Appendix 2-3
Appendix 2-4
Appendix 2-5
Appendix 2-6
Appendix 2-7
Appendix 2-8
Appendix 3-1
Appendix 3-2
Appendix 3-3
Appendix 3-4
Appendix 3-5
Appendix 3-6
Appendix 3-7
Appendix 4-1
Appendix 4-2
Appendix 4-3
Appendix 6-1
Appendix 6-2
Appendix 6-3
Appendix 7-1
Appendix 8-1
Appendix 8-2
Appendix 9-1
UI College of Law Strategic Plan 2006-2010
University of Iowa Strategic Plan 2005-2010
Professor Ann Estin‟s Memorandum to Curriculum Policy Committee re Upper
Level Curriculum Issues (with Attachments 1, 2, & 3)
UI College of Law Brochure on Joint Program
UI College of Law Student Handbook
LAWR Guidelines
List of First-year Electives for Spring 2007
UI College of Law Self Study 1999-2000
Policy on Non-Clinical Externships
ABA‟s Accreditation Committee Correspondences 2000-01
Faculty resumes
New Faculty Handbook
Faculty Bibliography October 2006
Iowa Principles and Practices for Charitable Nonprofit Excellence
Procedures for Tenure and Promotion Decision-Making College of Law,
University of Iowa
Criteria Governing Grant of Clinical Faculty Status
Faculty speaker series (talks approved for CLE credit) 2004-06
Applicant Selection Process Policy
Application Form 2006-07
Orientation Week Program 2006-07
Law Library Strategic Plan 2006-2010
Law Library Acquisition Policies & Collection Development Guidelines
Law Library Annual Report 2005-06
College of Law IT and Video Projects and Strategic Plan 2006-07
College of Law unprioritized space needs December 2004
Compendium of documents concerning Law School Commons
Budget 2006
10
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Chapter One: Introduction:
The Law School engaged in a two year process, designing a five year Strategic Plan in May
2006, and then producing the Self Study this fall. Iowa is consistently ranked in the top ten most
distinguished public law schools in the United States, and the Strategic Plan adopts the goal of
maintaining or improving that position, despite shrinking state funding.
Chapter Two: Program of Legal Education
The Law School offers a rich curriculum covering the full range of contemporary legal
education, with an especially significant concentration of courses organized in two areas: (1) the
International and Comparative Law Program (ICLP), and (2) the Innovation, Business & Law
Program. The College has a strong program of clinical legal education, and it offers a small but
well regarded LL.M. program in international and comparative law.
In conjunction with the change in deans in 2004, the Law School has embraced the opportunity
to engage in substantial curriculum reform. To date, the most important reforms concern the
first-year curriculum. The reform, implemented in part for the first time in the current academic
year, turns over the basic instruction in legal research and writing to a cadre of permanent and
full-time members of the instructional staff of the College who specialize in that type of learning
– LAWR instructors. In conjunction with the College‟s Writing Center, the reform is intended to
strengthen Iowa‟s historically strong commitment to the teaching of legal writing, which was
formerly done by the tenure track faculty. The other principal change to the first year has been
adoption of a one-course elective in the second semester. The faculty plans to review and
evaluate these reforms after they have been in operation for two or three years. In connection
with that review, the faculty will have to agree on some method of evaluation of curricular
reforms.
The Law School is just in the beginning stages of grappling with significant issues concerning
the upper level curriculum. The most fundamental issues concern the several ways in which
Iowa surpasses the ABA minimum standards for student contact with faculty. Iowa has a high
course requirement for graduation (90 credit hours), a long semester (fourteen weeks), and a long
classroom period (sixty minutes). Iowa also has traditionally required its full time faculty to
teach twelve credit hours per year (usually four courses). The high course load for professors
results in a large number of low-enrollment courses, and therefore more opportunities for
faculty/student interaction in those classes. The student requirements increase the number of
minutes spent in class. The result is that legal education at Iowa involves a high level of contact
with faculty and considerably more than many of Iowa‟s peer schools. It is not clear what the
faculty will do about this issue. They may decide to change nothing because of the apparent
pedagogical benefits of this investment in direct student-faculty contact. Or they may conclude
that the additional classroom burden at Iowa actually functions as a disincentive for students to
choose Iowa and unnecessarily complicates scheduling and discourages students from pursuing
non-credit learning options, including various types of pro bono public service. The faculty
11
needs to study and discuss the issue thoroughly because both the credits required for graduation
and the way in which those credits are calculated, as well as the standard course load for faculty,
affect many other curricular issues.
Similarly, the Law School has a fine program of externships set up by the Legal Clinic and a
program of non-clinical externships that are set up by the students themselves. The faculty is of
two minds about the value of non-clinical externships, but in any event, student motivation to
take non-clinic externships for credit is at least in part based on the high number of credits
required for graduation, and if the total were reduced, the need for the College to invest in
developing non-clinic externships might be reduced. Students might be more willing to try to get
job experience and the “foot in the door” by taking unpaid externships without credit. The
rather small number of students participating in non-clinic externships and the reforms currently
being considered by the faculty, indicate some of the weaknesses the current non-clinic
externship program has had.
The issue of the faculty teaching load is similarly foundational for many curricular issues. In
particular, the very richness of Iowa‟s current curriculum is partly a result of a policy of
requiring regular faculty to teach twelve credit hours (usually four courses) per year. The
requirement of a four-course load means that Iowa‟s faculty can offer more courses than
similarly sized faculties in which the normal load is three courses. The proliferation of courses
means lower enrollments in many courses, and the Iowa curriculum is characterized by a large
number of relatively small enrollment courses. The richness of the course offerings and the
greater contact with faculty in smaller courses are pluses, but there is also evidence that the
higher course load is an impediment to the recruitment of new faculty and conflicts with the
College‟s goal of improving its scholarly output. The course load issue will be decided soon.
Curricular programs in which Iowa excels also face challenges. The Legal Clinic has urgent
need for new space. The LL.M. program faces a declining applicant pool and has an urgent need
to increase the number and amount of tuition scholarships. The whole International and
Comparative Law Program (ICLP), including the LL.M. program, needs a part-time program
administrator to relieve faculty of some administrative duties and enhance services. Internal
“brain drain” resulting from the assumption of administrative duties by a number of key ICLP
faculty has created a shortage of faculty teaching in the ICLP area.
Chapter Three: Faculty
The Law School has a distinguished faculty with a strong tradition of substantial and significant
scholarship as well as strong commitments to teaching and service. Nevertheless, according to a
number of objective (but debatable) measures, overall scholarly output appears to have declined.
The decline is certainly due in part to the recent loss (through death, retirement, and lateral
transfer) of a number of very productive scholars. It is also understandable in light of Iowa‟s
traditional commitment of faculty resources to teaching and to faculty governance. The faculty
also has a strong tradition of self-governance, and most faculty take faculty committee work
quite seriously. The faculty is weighing the move to a three-course load for full-time faculty as a
way of dealing with this problem. The number of faculty members with Ph.D.s in non-law fields
12
has declined significantly (from eight to four) over the Self Study period. The Law School has
responded to all these challenges by creating a half-time position of Associate Dean for Faculty
Development.
The ethnic and racial diversity of the faculty is admirable, especially given our location in a state
with very few people of color. The numbers, however, have remained fairly stagnant. This has
happened through loss of some minority colleagues to wonderful opportunities including
deanships, and some difficulties attracting minority candidates to the state. Faculty recruitment
continues to target minority candidates, among other hiring goals.
Chapter Four: Student Life
A. Admissions
For the class entering in 2006, the Law School enjoyed a rise of over thirty percent in its
applicant pool, even though the national pool declined by almost seven percent. This healthy
increase in applicants appears to be due to vigorous recruiting efforts by the new Assistant Dean
of Admissions Collins Byrd, and a temporary admissions recruiter. But in-state applications are
actually declining to the extent that the 2006 entering class was just half from the state of Iowa.
The College is well staffed to meet the challenge of depending increasingly on non-resident
applications to maintain the quality of the class, but this will clearly be the admissions challenge
for the foreseeable future. Historically, Iowans constituted 65-70% of the class, but the
demographic realities may make this level impossible in the future.
With its long tradition of concern for diversity, the Law School does vigorous recruitment to
enhance diversity and uses a numbers plus admissions process as well, which does a careful read
of all files, and does not rely merely on numerical indicators. The total percentage that minorities
account for in the College‟s applicant pool has held fairly steady over the Self Study period, but
the percentage for African Americans has declined by half, and the percentage of African
Americans in the enrolled class has also dropped by about half over that same period. The
growth in both the applicant pool and the enrolled students has come chiefly with respect to
Asian Americans, with modest growth for Latinos/Latinas. Native Americans constitute a tiny
portion of the applicant pools and enrolled classes. The hiring of the new Assistant Dean of
Admissions in the summer of 2005 appears to have halted the decline in percentage of African
American applications, and it may take several years of recruiting efforts before the College sees
any substantial increase. The faculty will have to continue to monitor this issue.
B. Financial Aid
Iowa‟s relatively affordable price has been a major selling point. As a state university, Iowa has
the advantage of very low in-state tuition. University policies enable out of state students to get
in state tuition if they become a research assistant to a professor. The Law School has enhanced
its ability to attract a national applicant pool by providing financial aid packages that take
advantage of this option. Additionally, the College has been able to more than double the nonloan based financial aid it can make available to students and now offers that aid to about half of
13
the class. However, the largest single source of funding for this financial aid is the tuition setaside program, and the Law School has been advised that it will receive a smaller percentage of
these funds in the future. The College also has a small loan forgiveness program to help those in
public interest work who would otherwise not be able to afford to pursue public interest work
because of their debt load, but the College recognizes that it must find more ways to prevent
students from graduating with high debt.
C. Student Services
The Law School has enhanced its support of student services since the last Self Study. We have
a strong program of academic and career counseling for students, including an orientation
program for all incoming students in the week before they start their first semester of law school,
and a Writing Resource Center that provides professional tutoring in writing skills to all students.
The Law School has a new position of career advisor and judicial clerkship coordinator, a peer
mentoring program, and an Academic Achievement Program, which provides academic
counseling to all students who request it. However, since the summer of 2006, the Academic
Achievement Program has been staffed by part-time personnel. The faculty is scheduled to
review the Academic Achievement Program after the spring 2007 semester, when it is hoped that
it will be clearer how that program interacts with the new LAWR program for first-year students.
In addition to the new position of career advisor and judicial clerkship coordinator, the College
has added to its placement office a new Assistant Dean position in an effort to provide integrated
career services.
The Law School has an active system of student government, which is integrated into the faculty
governance through student members of the faculty committees.
The College actively encourages students to volunteer for a large variety of pro bono
opportunities, asking the students to record the hours they spend in such service in the Dean‟s
administrative office, and honoring students at graduation if they have served a substantial
number of hours. Student-run activities are also quite active in providing volunteer activities,
and the Equal Justice Foundation has been successful in raising funds to support students in the
summer to work for various non-profit or governmental employers locally, nationally, and even
internationally.
Chapter Five: Administration
The transition from the twenty-eight year deanship of N. William Hines to that of Carolyn Jones,
who assumed the deanship in July 2004, has gone smoothly. Dean Jones is assisted by five
Associate Deans, who are all long-standing members of the faculty. New positions of Associate
Dean for Faculty Development, Assistant Dean for Finance and Administration, and Assistant
Dean for Career Services have already enhanced the administrative strength. Additional new
positions to be filled in the near future are the Assistant Dean for Admissions and the Associate
Dean for Civic Engagement. The CLE program needs to be reviewed by the faculty in the short
term to determine the future direction of the program.
14
Chapter Six: Law Library
The Law Library is the crown jewel of the College, and indeed, of the University. It is
technologically up to date, collects information resources in all formats – electronic, print, and
microform – and currently has the second largest collection of bound volumes and microform
equivalents among all law schools in the United States. In addition, it has the second largest
number of different individually catalogued titles (third if only bound volumes are counted). By
any measure, it is one of the most comprehensive collections of on-site legal materials in the
country. It is strong not only in U.S. law, but also in foreign, comparative, and international
materials.
In general, the Law Library is understaffed and underfunded in comparison with other law
libraries with similarly sized collections and in relation to its responsibilities and aspirations. For
example, although the Law Library has the second largest collection of information resources
among all law schools, it has the eleventh largest financial resources. The chief challenge for the
Law Library is to maintain the excellence of the collection in the face of large and
disproportionate increases in the price of law books and journals and other legal information
resources, especially electronic data bases. Although the Law Library does have a substantial
acquisitions budget, the University has not been able to provide increases in the acquisitions
budget for the Law Library sufficient to permit it to maintain the breadth and depth of the
collection. The long-term prognosis for maintaining the excellence of the collection is thus not
very good unless additional sources of funding can be found. Efforts are being made to locate
additional sources of funding for this purpose. The Law Library is also facing considerable
space problems, and planning is underway to deal with them over the short, intermediate, and
long term.
Chapter Seven: Technology Resources
The College has a strong IT staff. There are the perennial budget concerns for maintaining,
replacing, and upgrading equipment.
Chapter Eight: Facilities
The Law School has outgrown the Boyd Law Building, which was built in 1986. Admissions,
the Law, Health Policy & Disability Center, the National Health Law and Policy Resource
Center, and the Larned A. Waterman Nonprofit Center are all housed in nearby buildings. Both
the Law Library and the Legal Clinic face serious space problems. There is a need for more
classroom space in order to give the College greater flexibility in scheduling. The administrative
suite is inadequate. While the College is planning for ways in the short term to reconfigure its
current space more efficiently and ways to move additional clusters of functions out of the Boyd
Law Building to nearby buildings, the long term solution has to involve a new law building to
supplement or replace the current one.
15
Chapter Nine: Law School Finances and University Support
Like many states, Iowa is in the process of reducing its support for tertiary education.
Nevertheless, the University is financially sound, and has been very supportive of the Law
School over the years. The principal sources of funding are: tuition and fees, which as a general
matter go directly into the University General Fund and are then allocated by the Provost to the
various colleges; and the Iowa Law School Foundation (ILSF), which raises private funds for the
Law School. The University administration has permitted the College to benefit from a number
of tuition surcharges which it has allowed the Law School to retain, but the College operates in
an environment in which its ability to raise its tuition is constrained.
The current operating budget of the Law School is $25.5 million. Adding assets from the ILSF,
UI Foundation, and UI which total $65.2 million, the Law School has total assets and
expenditures under supervision of over $90 million. A successful capital campaign during the
Self Study period raised $40 million. The ILSF has provided extra financial support that has
made a critical difference. The ILSF has grown substantially over the Self Study period and in
fiscal 2007 had assets of almost $54 million. While this endowment provides additional funding
that is the envy of many schools, it is also far below the endowments of the leading law schools,
especially the private ones. The challenge for the future is to keep that amount growing in
excess of annual inflation.
As a school with a distinguished faculty, Iowa has long had to accustom itself to the danger that
higher ranked schools would try to recruit its best faculty. Moreover, the University, including
the Law School, provides salaries near the bottom of the peer group. To combat this trend, the UI
Provost has initiated a program to increase faculty salaries to the point where the relative ranking
of UI salaries can become more in line with our peer institutions. However, most of the funds to
accomplish this are to be derived from reallocations of existing budgets, so the solution for the
problem of low faculty salaries has created additional challenges.
16
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
A. Overview
The University of Iowa College of Law (“Law School”) was founded in 1865 and formally
incorporated into The University of Iowa in 1868 when it moved from Des Moines, Iowa into the
former state capitol building in the heart of the University of Iowa campus. The Law School is
the oldest law school, public or private, west of the Mississippi River.1 It is located in Iowa City,
Iowa, and is one of eleven colleges of The University of Iowa.2
The University of Iowa is one of three public universities of higher learning in the State of Iowa.
It is under the control of the State Board of Regents. For the Fall 2006 semester, 29,979 students
enrolled. The net assets of UI at the end of each of the past three fiscal years were (in millions)
$1754.4 in 2003, $1794.6 in 2004 and $1902.2 in 2005.
The Interim President of the University is Gary Fethke, and the Vice-President for Academic
Affairs and Provost is Michael Hogan. The University, as a whole, is accredited by the North
Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools, is a member of the Association of
American Universities (“AAU”), and is associated with the following other ten universities in
the Big Ten Conference: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern,
Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, and Wisconsin. Additionally, The University of Iowa, along with
the other Big Ten universities, is associated with the University of Chicago in the Committee for
Institutional Cooperation (“CIC”).
The Law School is the only state-supported law school in the State of Iowa. The only other law
school in the state is Drake. The Law School has an annual budget of approximately $25.5
million for FY 2007 or approximately 4.2% of the total operating budget of The University of
Iowa. The collegiate budget is derived from a number of sources, but the two main funding
sources are the general funds of The University of Iowa and The University of Iowa Law School
Foundation (ILSF). The latter, coupled with some additional private funds held for the benefit of
the College outside of the ILSF, generates about $3.9 million of the $25.5 million budget. While
student tuition and fees collected by the University go directly into the University General Fund,
in recent years there have been special law student tuition supplements and fees which inure
directly to the Law School to support its academic, library, computer, and student-services
programs.
The Law School was one of the 30 founding members of the Association of American Law
Schools in 1900. The Law Chancellor of the College, Emlin McClain, was the second president
1
For a more complete early history of the Law School, see Judge Wright’s Law School, 125 Years Later by Richard
Lord Acton at http://www.uiowa.edu/~lawcoll/history/wright.html.
2
The colleges of The University of Iowa are: Tippie College of Business Administration, College of Dentistry,
College of Education, College of Engineering, Graduate College, College of Law, College of Liberal Arts, Carver College of
Medicine, College of Nursing, College of Pharmacy, and College of Public Health.
17
of the AALS. The Law School was one of the first in the United States to admit women (Mary
B. Hickey, Class of 1873) and is believed to be the first law school in the United States to admit
a black American (G. Alexander Clark, Class of 1878). As remarkable as it seems in American
legal education, the Law School was served by only four deans for more than sixty years: Dean
Mason Ladd (1939-1966), Dean David Vernon (1966-1971), Dean Lawrence Blades (19711976), and Dean N. William Hines (1976-2004). When Dean Hines stepped down after 28 years, he
was the longest sitting law Dean in the United States at that time. Dean Carolyn Jones began her term as
the 16th Dean of the College during the Fall 2004 semester.
As adopted in the 2006 Law School Strategic Plan, the mission of the Law School is to “serve
the people of Iowa, the nation, and the world by providing a superior legal education for its
students, engaging in leading-edge research concerning law-related questions, disseminating the
resulting scholarship widely to scholars, legal professionals, policy-makers and the public, and
performing professional and public service activities consistent with its teaching and research
obligations.” See Appendix 1-1 UI College of Law Strategic Plan. This mission statement
reflects the College‟s enduring commitment to the trilogy of teaching, scholarship and service.
For guidance in planning, setting priorities, and making decisions, we look to seven
interdependent commitments that are part of the University‟s listed Core Values in its Strategic
Plan Iowa‟s Promise 2005-2010: excellence, learning, community, diversity, integrity, respect
and responsibility. The University‟s Strategic Plan also lists the important goals of “cultivating
excellent graduate and professional programs,” and advancing “the research and scholarly
enterprise,” “diversity,” and “engagement.” See Appendix 1-2 University of Iowa Strategic Plan
2005-2010.
The Law School is consistently ranked in the top ten most distinguished public law schools in
the United States, and as our 2006 Strategic Plan makes clear, we intend to solidify and improve
our position among this group, despite decreased state funding. The Law School is also proud
of its outstanding law library, which is ranked 1st among public law schools, and 2d among all
law schools in terms of the number of volumes and volume equivalents and separately catalogued
different titles in its collection.
The Law School continues to be among the best in many non-quantifiable measurements of
excellence, including its continuing commitment to research and scholarship, the faculty‟s
availability to its students, its professional skills training curriculum, its revised first-year
writing program, the upper-class writing curriculum, and the continuing attractiveness of its
graduates to employers throughout the country.
For the Fall 2006 semester, the Law School has an enrollment of 655, consisting of 644 J.D.
students, eight LL.M.s, and three special students. There are fifty-five full-time faculty, who are
collectively engaged in the systematic study of the law, legal institutions, the role of law in
society, and the intersection of law and other disciplines. The Law School has retained its long
term commitment to a diverse faculty and student body. See Chapter 3 Faculty and Chapter 4
Student Life.
18
By its use of a variety of teaching methods, including the Socratic, lecture, and discussion group
methods, intense writing supervision, careful professional skills training, and classroom and
computer technologies, the Law School seeks to train its students to be effective and ethical
lawyers, thoughtful advocates, policymakers and scholars.
The Law School has a long and rich tradition of educational innovation and leadership in the legal
profession and within the legal academy. As early as 1869, professors of this law school were
experimenting with the then new “case method” of instruction, a year before Dean Langdell of
Harvard is credited with introducing that method at Harvard and revolutionizing law teaching.
The Iowa Law Bulletin (now the IOWA LAW REVIEW) was founded in 1891 as one of the first
law journals in the United States. That journal published the first American law journal
symposium of legal scholarship in 1935. Iowa Law School graduates and faculty have held
almost every high political office to which law-trained leaders can aspire from legislators to
Governors to United States Congressmen and Senators. They have served as Justices of the
Iowa Supreme Court, other state and federal courts, and one member of this faculty, former
dean, Wiley Rutledge, ultimately served as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme
Court.
B. Self Study and Strategic Planning Process
The two year Self Study and Strategic Planning process began during the Fall 2005 semester
when Dean Carolyn Jones appointed a faculty-staff-student committee chaired by Professor
Adrien Wing. The committee included two students chosen by the Iowa Student Bar Association
(ISBA). The first item of business was to develop a new Strategic Plan by May 2006 as part of
the University‟s overall strategic planning process. The committee members engaged in a
comprehensive review of all aspects of the Law School, including perusing past Self Studies and
Strategic Plans. The committee produced a substantial set of background materials containing
statistical data, various law school committee reports, etc. that was reviewed at meetings
throughout the fall semester. Based in part on this information, the committee devised a draft
Strategic Plan after consultation with various relevant faculty and staff members. It sponsored
an all day faculty retreat in March 2006 to consider the draft, providing the faculty with the
background materials as well. The draft Strategic Plan went through various revisions and was
circulated to all faculty and staff in that process. Student leadership and selected alums saw the
draft as well. It became final when adopted at a May 2006 faculty meeting.
The Dean appointed a slightly smaller committee for the second year of the process, including
most faculty members and staff from the prior year. The members included: Associate Dean for
Research and Information Management Arthur E. Bonfield; Associate Dean for International and
Comparative Law Programs John C. Reitz; Associate Dean for Student Affairs Linda McGuire;
Professor Randall Bezanson; Professor Jean Love; Professor Gerald Wetlaufer; Clinical
Professor John Allen; and Executive Law Librarian Mary Ann Nelson. Dean Carolyn Jones,
Associate Dean for Academic Affairs Eric G. Andersen, and Director of Information Technology
Dr. Kirk Corey served on an ex-officio basis. The ISBA reappointed the same student members
Daniel Dvorak and Kenneth Fukuda. Continuity between the strategic planning and Self Study
process was thus maximized. Professor Wing was reappointed Chair, and in the meanwhile she
19
has also begun a term as Associate Dean for Faculty Development. The committee consulted
with relevant staff and faculty members, reviewed the new Strategic Plan and other law school
documents, and devised a draft Self Study that was considered at committee meetings throughout
the Fall 2006 semester.
The Self Study presents a candid and rigorous self assessment which: describes our mission,
goals and objectives; describes our program of legal education; evaluates the strengths and
weaknesses of the Law School program; sets goals to improve the program; and identifies means
of accomplishing the Law School‟s unrealized goals.
The committee sought input from faculty, staff, students, and alums by circulating drafts. The
faculty considered a revised draft in December 2006. The Self Study was adopted by the faculty
on December 14.
20
CHAPTER TWO: PROGRAM OF LEGAL EDUCATION
A. Introduction
The University of Iowa College offers both a Juris Doctor (J.D.) Degree and a Masters in Law
(LL.M.). Offering the J.D. degree, as well as the LL.M. degree, contributes to the educational
mission of the Law School to provide a legal education for its students that fosters a lifetime of
professional growth. This growth includes a continuing quest for knowledge about the law, an
ability to use legal analysis and related skills proficiently, a commitment to the highest ethical
standards of the legal profession, and a realization of the power and responsibility of lawyers to
an American and international society.
The curricular objects of the Law School include: (1) developing all critical lawyering skills,
including the ability to analyze and synthesize cases, statutes, and other legal materials; (2)
employing legal argument both orally and in writing; (3) bringing to bear the learning of other
disciplines in the resolution of legal problems; (4) engaging in fact finding, interviewing, and
negotiation; (5) appreciating and understanding alternative means of preventing and solving
disputes; and (6) understanding the law in operation, including the operation of legal institutions.
The curriculum is developed on the premise that the College=s graduates will Apractice@ law in a
very broad range of private and public settings and that change is likely to characterize both the
particular career of an individual graduate and the nature of the law with which its graduates and
lawyers will deal over a lifetime. The curriculum assumes, too, that some students will not
practice Alaw,@ however broadly conceived, and that their legal education will be beneficial if it
offers in depth and varied insights into the possibilities and limitations of law as one contributing
factor in causing and solving important social problems.
In order to accomplish these goals the faculty exposes students to a wide variety of teaching
methodologies. In the course of their law school careers, students at the College have the
opportunity to study law in classroom courses, in professional skills courses, in small seminars,
through individual research, and through writing projects supervised by faculty or under the
auspices of a myriad of student supervised programs. Without any suggestion that the quality of
instruction can be captured in writing, an overview of the various teaching methods actually
employed is helpful for understanding the utility, purpose and diversity that exists in the Law
School=s curriculum.
(1) Classroom Teaching. The substantial majority of all student academic hours are devoted to
studying legal subjects in traditional classroom settings focusing on legal argument and analysis.
The inevitable variations in teaching approaches among faculty preclude any easy
generalizations about the characteristic teaching methodology at the College. Nevertheless, it is
probably fair to say that, although individual faculty members employ a wide range of teaching
styles in the traditional classroom, a key aim of all these styles is to promote and encourage
active student participation in the legal analysis that occurs in the classroom. A method that
combines casebook study and discussion in class continues to be the dominant teaching mode.
“Socratic” discussion is supplemented by lecture and explanation, and the Acasebook method@ of
study is often replaced in whole or in part by a problem-oriented approach or classroom
21
simulation techniques. An increasing number of faculty are incorporating computer and internet
technologies into their teaching. Many faculty members have developed computer slide
presentations for their courses. They also use commercially published materials available on
CDs, incorporate the Internet in their classroom instruction, and create web course materials to
complement the classroom experience.
(2) The Teaching of Legal Writing in the First Year Legal Analysis, Writing, and Research
Courses and in Upper Level Seminars. The other traditional focus of legal education has been
legal writing, and the College, building on its place in a university that is particularly well known
as The Writing University, has given special emphasis to providing law students with training in
legal writing. The University is host to the world famous Writers Workshop and International
Writers Program. The College has long been a leader in providing first year legal writing
training through small sections of its regular first year courses. As will be discussed, The
College has just recently revamped that program in an effort to make it even stronger than it was
before by hiring a cadre of dedicated legal writing instructors to take over that function. The
traditional medium for upper level writing instruction has been the seminar, and the Law School
continues to maintain a rich seminar offering each year. All upper level students are required to
earn at least two writing credits in an activity that is directly supervised and graded by the
faculty. The only way students can satisfy this requirement is by taking some combination of
seminars, independent research and writing credits, externship credits, or clinical case drafting.
As a practical matter, this requirement gives students strong incentives to participate in at least
one seminar. Specifically, students may not satisfy this requirement through the writing
opportunities mentioned in the next paragraph.
(3) Other Opportunities for Student Research and Writing in “Co-Curricular” Activities. The
College has also long offered students numerous opportunities for research and writing in the
context of various “co-curricular” activities, such as student journals and moot court boards.
These are important adjuncts to the faculty-centered education because they provide additional
experience in legal writing and research. These activities also provide opportunities for students
to develop and demonstrate such skills as leadership and organizational ability. Under the
College‟s rules, these educational opportunities may supplement, but may not supplant, the
faculty-centered instruction in legal writing.
(4) Professional Skills Programs, Simulations, Clinical Programs, and Externships. The faculty
is committed to the idea that a premier legal education at the beginning of the twenty-first
century has to offer training in more than just the classroom skills traditionally taught in law
schools. The College has a strong program in clinical education, which is supplemented by a
number of courses with strong “professional skills” components, as well as by opportunities for
faculty-supervised externships.
One of the main issues the faculty agreed to tackle at the time of hiring the new dean, Carolyn
Jones, was curriculum reform of the J.D. program. The College had not had any serious
curriculum reform for many years, even though the faculty as a whole or through its committee
structure has long devoted substantial efforts to reviewing the curriculum. Several faculty
committees have been involved in more radical reform efforts over the last several years and
22
significant changes are being made, so the J.D. curriculum is very much a work in progress.
One faculty committee was tasked with carrying out the faculty=s decision to convert the first
year writing program into a program taught by professional legal writing and research
instructors. Another committee was asked to develop proposals for the reform of the upper level
curriculum and for the implementation of the one elective course choice that was introduced into
the first year curriculum. This chapter draws heavily on the work of those committees, as
indicated below.
B. Requirements for J.D. Degree, Academic Year, Quantity and Periods of
Academic Instruction
1. Basic ABA Requirements for Amount and Timing of Program of Education
The J.D. degree is awarded to students who have completed ninety credit hours of academic
work, earned four writing units for written work in their second and third years, and satisfied all
other academic requirements of the College. Required course work includes the first-year
program, a course in Professional Responsibility, and Constitutional Law II.
Students enrolled in the three-year J.D. program take courses in both the Fall and Spring
semesters. The Fall semester runs generally from the fourth week in August through to the
second week in December, and the spring semester runs generally from the second week in
January to the middle of May, thus extending the regular academic year over ten months.
Students may also, but are not required to, take courses in the two summer sessions and in the
breaks between semesters or at Spring Break (Aintersession@ courses), as well. Students enrolled
in the Accelerated Program enter in May at the beginning of the first summer session and can
complete their legal education in three summers and four semesters over three academic years.
No student is permitted to graduate in as few as twenty four months, as allowed by the current
ABA rule, Standard 304 (c).
The Fall and Spring semesters each consist of fourteen weeks or seventy days of instruction in
the fall and sixty-nine days in the spring. The summer consists of two sessions, each running for
52 weeks for a total of twenty-five days. Classes during the Fall and Spring semesters are
typically sixty minutes long (not fifty), though some classes, especially those taught at the end of
the week, are presented in ninety minute segments or even two hour segments. Summer session
classes are usually either ninety minutes or two hours long. Intersession courses generally meet
for a total of fourteen hours of classroom time spread out over one week, followed by a one hour
in-class examination at the end of the week or some other evaluation procedure, such as a
research paper or take-home examination.
As a result of its 14-week semesters and its use of full 60-minute classroom hours, Iowa requires
substantially more instructional time for graduation than what is required by ABA
Curriculum Standard 304. The Curriculum Policy Committee‟s memorandum of November 30,
2004, appended as Appendix 2-1, shows that Iowa requires 75,600 minutes for graduation, far in
excess of the ABA requirement of 58,000 minutes, and an academic year of 140 days,
substantially in excess of the 130-day ABA minimum. Iowa also substantially exceeds the ABA
23
requirement that students have at least 45,000 minutes of instruction in regularly scheduled class
sessions. As noted in the memo, Iowa has a series of different limits on the types of credit hours
that students may put toward the 90 hours required for graduation, including a limit on cocurricular credit hours, a limit on non-law credit hours, and a limit on clinical credit hours.
There are also several cumulative limits under the law school rules. One of those cumulative
limits tracks the ABA Standards: students may not earn more than 36 hours of credit in any
combination of co-curricular programs, non-law courses, clinic and non-clinic externships,
independent research, supplementary writing, directed research and writing, and writing
tutorials. This means that students must earn at least 54 of their 90 credit hours, or 45,360
minutes, in regularly scheduled classroom instruction.
The significant extent to which Iowa exceeds the ABA requirements raises the question whether
Iowa should make further changes to its curriculum. More particularly, the question is whether
Iowa should lighten the load for its students to encourage greater use of externships and other
learning opportunities outside of regularly scheduled class sessions in the law school, or whether
Iowa should maintain the status quo on the grounds that it provides a richer and more intensive
educational experience for its students than that contemplated by the minimum ABA standards.
2. Enforcement of ABA Rules for Students
The Law School=s Registrar, Debra Paul, enforces the Iowa graduation requirements, including
the limitations on clinic, externships, non-law courses, etc. Associate Dean for Student Affairs
Linda McGuire reminds the students of these requirements annually in meetings advising on
course selection, and the Registrar also helps students conduct their own audits of their progress
toward graduation and interprets curricular requirements as applied in individual cases.
The Law School has been liberal in allowing joint degree programs with other disciplines that
relate to law, but the Law School allows only twelve credits from the other discipline to count
toward the law degree (six more non-law credits than a J.D. student who is not in a joint degree
may count toward the J.D.), and twelve credits amounts to only 10,800 minutes. Participation in
joint degree programs cannot therefore cause the student to dip below the ABA requirement of at
least 45,000 minutes in regularly scheduled classes. Because the Associate Dean for Student
Affairs is required to approve all non-law course selections, there is a regular review of the nonlaw joint degree courses which law students take. In addition, non-law courses taken in joint
degree programs are taken in other parts of the University of Iowa, and are therefore subject to
periodic audits by those departments and colleges and by the University. See Appendix 2-2
College of Law Brochure on Joint Programs.
Attendance: The College=s Student Handbook states that regular and punctual attendance is
required for all classes, and professors are urged to notify the Associate Dean for Student Affairs
of any students who appear not to be fulfilling that responsibility. See Appendix 2-3 College of
Law Student Handbook at 45. Many professors establish class attendance policies that either
require a student to furnish excuses for all classes missed or allow a small number of absences
without explanation and require the instructor=s permission for all additional absences.
24
Professors are asked to set out all such rules clearly in the course syllabi, and all professors are
asked to turn in to the Associate Dean copies of their syllabi at the beginning of each semester.
Course Load: The normal course load for students is around fifteen credit hours per semester
(which would result in ninety credit hours, the number required for graduation, in six semesters).
Students are prohibited from taking more than twenty percent of their graduation requirements
(eighteen credits) in any semester. The Law School‟s Registrar reviews all student registrations
shortly after each semester begins in order to prevent any violation of this rule.
Consistent with the ABA‟s requirement, the College‟s Student Handbook forbids students who
are enrolled for more than twelve hours in a semester to work more than twenty hours per week.
See Appendix 2-3 at 75. The Law School monitors its own student work force for compliance
with this rule. The administration also meets with any student whom it learns is engaged in
outside employment that violates this rule. Additionally, the Law School encourages first-year
students not to work at all.
C. First Year Curriculum and First Year Legal Analysis, Writing, and Research
Instruction
Until the current academic year, the Law School followed the traditional approach to the first
year curriculum. It consisted entirely of required courses. Legal research and writing instruction
was offered in Asmall sections@ taught by regular tenure and tenure-track professors within the
substantive first-year courses. This academic year, the College is implementing two major
changes to this traditional model for the first year curriculum. First, legal writing and research is
now taught in stand-alone Legal Analysis, Writing, and Research (LAWR) courses by legal
writing instructors, and second, first year law students will be able to choose one course in their
second semester from a list of upper level courses that are open to them. Table 2-1 below shows
the changes. Because of these significant, recent changes, the first year curriculum remains a
subject of active faculty discussion. The faculty is monitoring the changes and continuing to
debate further changes.
25
TABLE 2-1: FIRST-YEAR CURRICULA 2005-06/2006-07
Last Academic Year (2005-06)
This Academic Year (2006-07)
Fall:
Fall:
Intro. Law & Legal Reasoning (orientation
week) (1 credit hour)
Contracts & Sales I (3)
Criminal Law (3)
Property I (3)
Torts (3)
Small Section Legal Writing (2)
Intro. Law & Legal Reasoning (orientation
week) (1 credit hour)
Contracts (4)
Total Credit Hours: 15
Spring:
Spring:
Civil Procedure (4)
Con. Law I (3)
Contracts & Sales II (3)
Property II (3)
Small Section Legal Writing (2)
Civil Procedure (4)
Con. Law I (3)
Criminal Law (3)
Elective Course (3)
LAWR-2 (2)
Property (4)
Torts (4)
LAWR-1 (2)
The new LAWR courses are intended to be taught by instructors recruited from the ranks of
professional legal writing instructors. Although the Asmall section@ program of legal analysis,
research, and writing taught by regular professors in conjunction with regular substantive courses
in the first year was long a particular strength of the Iowa program, the faculty determined that
recent years have seen the formation of a new cadre of legal instructors, those who are
specialized in the teaching of legal writing and research (LAWR instructors). The Iowa faculty
came to doubt whether they could as effectively and efficiently provide the type of basic writing
and organizational instruction, as well as the detailed instruction in legal research, that these
specialized instructors can offer. In addition, it was argued that using regular professors, who are
expected to be engaged actively in research, to teach the basics of legal writing and research,
might not be the best use of their time. Finally, the Asmall section@ program was plagued by
difficulties in staffing all of the small sections with regular faculty, especially after the loss of
several senior faculty who had assisted in founding the program and were especially committed
to it. As a result, the faculty determined that it could best continue the proud Iowa tradition of
providing superior legal writing instruction by hiring LAWR instructors to provide the first year
instruction in legal analysis, writing, and research.
26
The College has recruited its first three LAWR instructors for this academic year (2006-07), each
of whom teaches two LAWR sections per semester, and has supplemented them with three
visitors or adjuncts, each of whom teaches one LAWR section per semester. The faculty plans
eventually to have five full-time LAWR instructors to give instruction each semester to all firstyear J.D. students. The addition of these LAWR positions has been financed by a tuition
supplement. The nine sections range now from nineteen to twenty-two students. Next year,
with a full ten sections, it is estimated that the sections will average twenty-one students.
The LAWR program has well-defined expectations for the specific kinds of written work to be
assigned and graded, including specific ranges for number of pages to be produced, and in
general, the required work is quite similar to that which had been required in the previous Asmall
section@ program. In the Fall semester, the LAWR Guidelines call for: A(1) an objective writing
on a factual problem requiring close legal analysis that requires students to locate cases in the
library using known citations; (2) an objective writing on a factual problem requiring close legal
analysis that requires students to identify appropriate cases from a >closed universe= of cases; (3)
two rewrites; and (4) other writing assignments in the form of short exercises to hone student
writing at the sentence level and to introduce students to various documents. Examples of these
types of assignments include plain-language revision of judicial opinions, case holdings, case
briefs, case syntheses, draft contracts, and client letters.@ See Appendix 2-4 LAWR Guidelines.
In the Spring semester, the Guidelines call for: A(1) two writings on a factual problem requiring
close legal analysis, one of which must be a persuasive writing; and (2) two rewrites.@ The
second semester assignments are to involve independent research, and one of the assignments is
to take the form of an appellate brief, which becomes the basis for the oral argument that is also
part of the second semester program. In both semesters, the LAWR instructors are to hold
individual conferences with each student at least once a semester, and more often if needed. The
LAWR courses may meet for up to two hours per week for classroom instruction related to the
writing program. Although not specified in the LAWR Guidelines, LAWR instructors are
encouraged to teach their students the Bluebook citation system, using a self-teaching set of
Bluebook problems developed by the Iowa faculty. All writing in the LAWR course is to be
graded according to a rather strict curve set out in the Guidelines. Legal research skills are taught
to all first-year law students as part of the LAWR course by Law Library reference librarians.
Their teaching of these legal skills is discussed in Chapter 6, Section E.
Although the Law School has transferred the chief first year writing instruction to the LAWR
sections, it has not abolished its program of small sections in substantive courses. In each
semester, there are six small sections of approximately thirty-one students each. The faculty
teaching these small sections are required by the LAWR Guidelines to add to the substantive
legal instruction in their course, in the fall, A(1) a practice essay examination question with
individualized written or oral feedback, and (2) an oral exercise that requires students to explain
legal concepts in >plain English= (e.g., in a simulated client-counseling session),@ and in the
spring semester, Aan oral exercise that is aimed at developing skills in one or more of the
following areas: (a) factual investigation; (b) counseling; (c) negotiation; (d) oral advocacy; or
(e) other fundamental lawyering skills.@ These exercises are to be graded on a pass/fail basis.
The faculty has thus utilized the switch to the LAWR program to increase the amount of skills
training provided in the first year curriculum.
27
The other major change to the first year curriculum has been to add one elective course in the
second semester of the first year. Each first-year student will be entitled to select one elective
course in the spring semester from the rest of the curriculum. Instructors of those courses have
been asked to designate those offerings which would not be suitable for second-semester firstyear students, and a list of the acceptable courses has been publicized to students. See Appendix
2-5 for List of First-year Electives for Spring 2007. In moving to offer one elective in the first
year, Iowa knows that it is in good company. The faculty expects that the move will give first
year students a greater sense of involvement and excitement because they can choose one of their
courses. Both of these changes are to be evaluated by the faculty at the end of three years.
The Law School has long required all entering students, J.D. and LL.M. candidates alike, to
attend an introductory, one-credit course in legal reasoning. After a period of some
experimentation, the faculty decided in 1996 to offer this course during the week-long
orientation program held just before the start of the fall semester. Only LL.M. students who
already have earned an American J.D. degree or who earned their first law degree in a common
law jurisdiction are exempted from this requirement. The course is taken on a pass-fail basis,
and includes a two-hour examination at the end of the week.
The College also has a fully staffed Writing Resource Center, and all members of that staff are
available to work with students on their writing assignments. See Section H below. First-year
students may consult the Writing Resource Center for help on their small section assignments so
long as the LAWR professor approves.
All first-year courses have at least two sections, and most have multiple sections because of the
small section program. With the exception of the LAWR course, virtually all the first-year
courses are taught by full-time faculty. In the fall of 2006, the only substantive first-year course
not taught by an Iowa tenured or tenure-track professor was one section of Torts, taught by
Visiting Professor Geoffrey McLay, who holds a tenured position on the law faculty at Victoria
University of Wellington, New Zealand. In the spring of 2007, the only first-year course taught
by a visitor will be one section of Constitutional Law I, taught by Adjunct Professor Mark
Schantz, formerly a full-time member of the faculty and most recently General Counsel of the
University of Iowa. Thus the full-time faculty teaches substantially all of the first year
curriculum. A similar picture can be painted for the prior academic year. In fact, these patterns
have been relatively consistent for a number of years, with small changes attributable to changes
in the overall size of the law faculty.
D. Upper Level Curriculum
Faculty committees have been studying the upper level curriculum for the past several years.
Under the leadership of Professor Ann Estin, the Curriculum Policy Committee concluded a
detailed analysis of certain aspects of the upper level curriculum in the fall of 2004. Professor
Estin=s November 30, 2004, memorandum summarizing those analyses is included as Appendix
2-1. Reference will be made to specific parts of that memorandum and its attachments in the
following discussion. As a result, reform to the upper level curriculum is likely to occupy at
least as much faculty attention as changes to the first year curriculum. For example, the Strategic
28
plan calls for an exploration of “in class teaching innovations in large classes, perhaps using
technologies that will sharpen analytical and writing skills, particularly drafting.” It also calls for
an increased emphasis on professional skills instruction. See Section I.2 below.
The upper-class curriculum includes a variety of educational opportunities that include
classroom experiences, seminars, tutorials, independent research, professional skills training, and
legal writing experiences.
1. Classroom Courses and Seminars
The upper level curriculum consists of a rich number of classroom courses as well as seminars,
professional skills courses, and activities administered chiefly by students under the supervision
of the faculty (Aco-curriculars@). With the exception of Constitutional Law II and Professional
Responsibility, all upper level courses are elective, and students are free to determine for
themselves when they take the two required courses. Appellate Advocacy I has also been a
required course, but with the change to the two new LAWR courses, the requirement for law
students to have at least one experience of appellate advocacy will be satisfied by the spring
LAWR course, so Appellate Advocacy will also become elective. The method by which the
contestants for the Van Oosterhout and Baskerville Moot Court Competitions will be chosen in
the future is under discussion. See Section G.2.b below.
While the College neither designates nor recommends which courses should be taken in either
the second or third years, many courses are informally regarded by the student body as primarily
Asecond@ or primarily Athird@ year courses, and the Dean=s office schedules courses on that basis.
Seminars generally have an enrollment cap of ten students. Classes may also be capped to
equalize enrollment across multiple sections. Furthermore, the College=s policy is that no more
than 100 persons shall be enrolled in any course and the facilities are designed to further that
goal. No classroom except the Levitt Auditorium seats more than 100 persons.
In the 2005-06 academic year, seventy-three classroom courses (other than professional skills
courses including clinic, seminars, and a variety of co-curriculars) were available to second and
third year students. Most upper level courses are offered for three credits. However, in the past,
there has been a perception that it would be desirable to have more four credit courses, and in
2005 the faculty authorized a considerable expansion of the number of courses that could be
offered for four credits. In the current academic year (2006-07), Basic Federal Income Taxation
(fall semester), Corporations I, Bankruptcy, Copyrights, Family Law, Debt Transactions,
Securities Regulation, and Taxation of Business Enterprise are all four credit courses.
TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF UPPER-CLASS CREDIT HOURS EARNED 2005-06
Courses
Seminars
Clinic
Total
9,103 (84.7%)
1,065 (9.9%)
567 (5.2%)
10,735
29
TABLE 2-3 SUMMARY OF UPPER-CLASS CREDIT HOURS EARNED 2004-05
Courses
Seminars
Clinic
Total
9,341 (82.8%)
1,224 (10.8%)
715 (6.3%)
11,280
a. Seminars
For a discussion of the College‟s seminar program, see Section G Upper Level Legal Analysis,
Writing, and Research. Students are incentivized to take at least one seminar by the requirement
to earn at least two writing credits in an activity that is directly supervised and graded by the
faculty. Students may not satisfy this requirement through writing done in connection with cocurricular activities.
b. The Issue of Small Size Classes
Attachment 1 to the November 30, 2004 memorandum from Ann Estin, which is appended to
this Self Study as Appendix 2-1, analyzes class size for all upper level courses at Iowa from
summer 1999 to Spring 2004. It shows that the Iowa upper level curriculum consisted during
that time period of nine large enrollment courses (enrollment averaging over 100 per year),
twenty-four medium to large enrollment courses (thirty-five to sixty students per year), fortyeight medium to small enrollment courses (twenty to thirty-five students per year), and sixty-two
small enrollment courses (fewer than twenty students per year, excluding seminars).
The high enrollment courses are, as one would expect, all (with the exception of Trial Advocacy)
courses tested on many state bar examinations, and they all are basic law courses that have
traditionally figured at the heart of legal education. All of these courses are taught in at least two
sections per year to assure workable class sizes. In planning each academic year=s schedule, the
goal is to have at least one section of each high enrollment course taught in each semester and for
the most part this goal is accomplished.
A few of the smaller classes are also offered in more than one section per year, making for even
smaller class sizes, and thirteen of the small enrollment courses had enrollments in the single
digits. The study seems to reinforce a concern the faculty raised in the last Self Study about the
large number of small sized courses. On the other hand, the small classes represent a
pedagogical opportunity for students and faculty and enable Iowa to present an especially rich
curriculum. The faculty is currently discussing the possibility of moving from a normal four
course load for faculty to a three course load to bring Iowa in line with most of its peer schools.
The faculty assumes that this change will necessarily reduce the number of courses offered and
put more pressure on the issue of eliminating or limiting very low enrollment courses. So the
issue of class size is an issue the faculty is continuing to discuss.
30
2. Co-curriculars and the Issue of Teaching by Permanent Faculty
The 1999-2000 Self Study estimated that approximately seventy-five percent of the total
academic credits earned by second and third year students were earned in courses, seminars, and
clinic courses, which are taught by faculty, and approximately twenty-five percent were earned
in student-run co-curricular activities. See Appendix 2-6 College of Law Self Study 1999-2000.
It is important to note that all of these co-curricular credits are also supervised by faculty. For
example, credit is given for participation in the various moot court activities only after a faculty
member has read the student‟s brief and authorized the granting of credit. Papers written for a
journal receive credit only after the student editors have deemed the paper to satisfy their
requirements and the faculty supervisor has given the paper at least a hasty read to ascertain that
is worthy of credit. Nevertheless, the degree of faculty supervision of credits earned in cocurricular activities is substantially lower than it is in faculty taught courses. The previous Self
Study thus indicated concern that the percentage of overall credits earned that were earned in cocurriculars appeared to be rising.
The method for estimating the co-curricular hours used in the 1999-2000 Self Study was as
follows: It was assumed that upper-class students average thirty semester hours of course work
each year. The total credits earned by upper-class students in a year would then be 30 times the
number of upper-class students enrolled in each year. Subtracting the totals indicated above in
Table 2-2 for upper-class credits earned in non-co-curricular activities would yield an estimate
for the number of co-curricular credit hours earned each year.3 Applying the same method to
academic year 2005-06 results in an estimate that co-curriculars comprised fourteen percent of
the total of credits earned, while faculty-taught courses comprised eighty-six percent of the total.
For 2004-05, the estimates are that co-curriculars comprised sixteen percent and faculty-taught
courses comprised eighty-four percent.4
This calculation indicates that the percentage of academic credits earned in co-curriculars has
declined since the last Self Study. Indeed, the last Self Study indicated that it expected this to be
the case because of the adoption by the faculty of two new rules just before that Self Study was
finalized. One rule requires each student to earn at least two writing credits under direct faculty
supervision, i.e., in a seminar or independent research and writing course. The other rule forbids
a student from earning more than six credits in co-curricular activities. While these rules appear
to have resulted in a lowering of the percentage of credits earned in co-curriculars, the faculty
will need to continue to monitor this issue. In the event the faculty would decide to reduce
3
The figures in Table 2-2 exclude Independent Research and Writing and Tutorial credits, but there are not
very many in any given year. They also exclude co-curricular credits, of course. The method described
undoubtedly understates the percentage of credits earned in courses and overstates the percentage earned in cocurricular activities because they do not take summer course enrollments into account. During the Summer
semester, no credit is earned in co-curricular activities.
4
In the fall of 2005 there were 432 second and third year students; in the Spring of 2006 there were 400.
In the fall of 2004 there were 467 and in the spring of 2005, there were 431. The numbers for Fall and Spring
semesters were averaged for each academic year.
31
somewhat the total credit hours required for graduation, it would be particularly important for the
faculty to think about the likely impact on co-curricular activities. At present, the Law School
has achieved an especially substantial student participation in the educational function of the
College without any substantial watering down of the education provided, but rather with an
enhancement both of the educational and social aspects of the College. A reduction in total
credits required for graduation might weaken the incentives for some of that participation in cocurriculars, so the faculty will need to consider changes carefully. Nevertheless, at the present
time, it seems clear that the faculty is directly providing something on the order of eighty-five
percent of the academic credits earned.
3. Information and Counseling about the Curriculum; Registration for Courses
Information is provided to students both formally and informally. Formal sources include the
College=s catalogue, an annual Guide to Courses, registration materials, the College=s web site
(which includes the Guide to Courses), and the weekly e-mail Docket newsletter. College-wide
meetings are held each year to give advice to the students on registration issues. Informal
sources of information include other students and individual faculty members. 5
The 1999-2000 Self Study indicated a concern that the College catalogue (the Guide to Courses)
contained courses that the faculty was not continuing to offer. The Registrar now follows the
rule of eliminating all courses from the Guide to Courses which have not been offered within the
current or past year. As of fall 2006, there should be no courses listed in the catalogue which
have not been offered since the 2005-06 academic year.
Registration materials have traditionally been distributed to students part way through the spring
semester with a listing of all courses to be offered in the following summer and fall and a
tentative list of courses to be offered in the following spring (for student planning purposes but
not for registration). In order to select those students who will be permitted to enroll in limited
enrollment courses (these include certain of the large enrollment classes that are habitually
oversubscribed and they also include small courses which for pedagogical reasons are limited in
size, such as the clinic or seminars, which are normally limited to ten students), the College uses
a system involving both a Alottery@ element and a priority element. For some courses, this
system has been refined recently so that student enrollment is determined according to a point
system under which each student is given points (fifteen for third year, ten for second year) and
is permitted to Aspend@ the points according to the student=s own priorities. 6
The 1999-2000 Self Study indicated some concern over the lateness with which course offerings
for the following year were made available to students for registration and suggested that
5
The advising system for helping students make curricular choices is described below in Chapter 4 on
Student Life.
6
Because LL.M. students are not on campus usually until the Fall semester of their year of academic
study, so that they are unable to pre-register, the Registrar has begun saving a few spots for LL.M.s in courses that
we expect will be especially popular with LL.M. students, such as Corporations I.
32
students might be better served with a schedule showing course offerings for at least the next
three semesters. The College has sought to address those concerns with some administrative
changes. Dean Carolyn Jones has delegated most of the curriculum planning to the Associate
Dean for Academic Affairs. Associate Dean Andersen has this year called for faculty course
preferences before the winter holiday break, thus attempting to move the curriculum planning
process forward in time. Thus the faculty is working on improving this issue but it may need
further attention. In particular, one view on the faculty is that the course schedule should be
made a full year ahead (by mid-spring of each year for the following academic year), including
the results of lotteries used to allocate seats in oversubscribed courses. If the faculty moves to a
three-course load, the resultant reduction in the number of courses offered will put additional
pressure on this issue because more courses will be offered only on an every-other-year basis.
4. Concentration Areas within Curriculum and Special Strengths of Iowa
Curriculum
The Law School does not have any certificate programs or other special designations of subject
matter concentrations on its diplomas. However, the Iowa curriculum does have particular
concentrations of great strength that provide opportunities for both students and faculty. Two of
these areas are formally organized within the faculty – the International and Comparative Law
Program (ICLP) and the Innovation, Business & Law Program. They are described below in
Sections E and F, respectively.
Other groupings of the curriculum are more informal. Attachment 2 to Professor Estin=s
November 30, 2004 memorandum (Appendix 2-1) identifies eighteen subject areas into which
the Iowa curriculum at that time could be grouped. The principal development since the writing
of that memorandum has been the development of the Innovation, Business & Law Program,
which combines the Corporate and Antitrust area with the Intellectual Property and Technology
area.
5. Professional Responsibility Instruction
The Law School has long had a requirement that students take a course in Professional
Responsibility which covers the Model Rules of Professional Conduct of the American Bar
Association and other standards for professional conduct. The College offers courses on this
subject matter in one-, two-, and three-credit formats and generally offers at least two different
professional responsibility courses in any academic year, and often one each spring and fall
semester. The one credit version of the course is generally offered during an intersession, while
the other formats are generally offered during the regular academic year. Students may satisfy
this requirement by taking any one of these courses.
The course has generally been taught by regular faculty members, but former Justice Linda
Neuman of the Iowa Supreme Court has been teaching the one-credit version of the course
during intersessions in the past several years.
33
6. Areas of ABA Concern That Are Not Present in Iowa Curriculum
The College does not have any certificate programs, distance education, part-time programs, or
bar review courses for credit.
E. Special Strength of Iowa Curriculum: The International and Comparative Law
Program (ICLP)
The Law School has been recognized as a leader in the area of international and comparative
legal studies.7 The recognition reflects the strong group of faculty that is committed to
international and comparative law study and the great range of courses this faculty has been
offering in this field. Goal 2 Theme 3 of the Strategic Plan commits the faculty to “maintain [its]
high-quality program of instruction in the fields of international and comparative law and
enhance the incorporation of global issues in the Law School curriculum.”
The Law School=s international and comparative law program is also part of an internationalist
tradition reflected in related research and teaching programs of the University of Iowa. Most of
these related programs are located in the UI Office of International Programs, which unites under
the Associate Provost and Dean for International Programs several offices supporting
international studies8 with twenty-one international and interdisciplinary teaching and research
programs.9 International Programs (IP) has in the past been able to provide some additional
international resources for law students and faculty. For example, IP has in the past had U.S.
Department of Education support as a national resource center (NRC), a form of support that
generally carries with it a number of Foreign Language and Area Studies scholarships (FLAS)
for students to study foreign languages. The College=s students have been quite successful in
7
According to the 2006 ranking of professional schools by U.S. News and World Reports, Iowa=s
international and comparative law programs ranked fifth among similar programs offered by all public
universities. America=s Best Graduate Schools 2007, U.S. NEWS AND WORLD REPORT, Apr. 10, 2006,
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/grad/rankings/law/brief/lawrank_brief.php (restricted to paying subscribers);
Gregg Hennigan, Nine UI Colleges, Programs in Top 10, IOWA CITY PRESS CITIZEN, Apr. 1, 2006, at 1A. The
College has also been recognized specifically for the strength of its comparative law offerings. Ugo Mattei, Some
Realism About Comparativism: Comparative Law Teaching in the Hegemonic Jurisdiction, 50 (Supp.) AM. J.
COMP. L. 87, 95 (2002) (placing Iowa among the top fifteen faculties in the country). In 1999, Azur, a magazine
for law students and young lawyers in Germany, included the College of Law in its list of the top fifteen LL.M.
programs in the United States.
8
This includes the Office of International Students and Scholars; the Office for Study Abroad; the Iowa
City Foreign Relations Council; and the Council for International Visitors.
9
ALLNet (the Autonomous Language Learning Network); African Studies Program; Center for Asian and
Pacific Studies; Caribbean, Diaspora and Atlantic Studies Program; Center for Russian, East European and
Eurasian Studies; 18th and 19th Century Interdisciplinary Colloquium; Confucius Institute; Crossing Borders;
European Studies Group; Foreign Language Acquisition Research and Education; Global Health Studies
Program; Institute for Cinema and Culture; International Forum for US Studies; International Studies; Latin
American Studies Program; Middle East and Muslim World Studies; Opera Studies Group; South Asian Studies
Program; and University of Iowa Center for Human Rights.
34
winning the competition for the FLAS scholarships. However, in 2006, the government failed to
renew the award of an NRC grant to the University of Iowa, and consequently, IP does not have
the resources, including FLAS scholarships, that it used to have. However, IP intends to continue
applying for funding, and the Law School‟s ICLP unit continues to participate with IP and is
represented on the IP Executive Board by Associate Dean Reitz.
1. Faculty, Administrative, and Library Resources
The Law School has assembled an impressive team of scholars working in the international and
comparative law areas, and that team has held together over most of the review period. As of
Fall 2006, Iowa has nine full-time faculty members whose teaching and scholarship are
substantially focused on international and comparative subjects (the “ICLP-1” faculty),10 and
most of these professors have been at Iowa during the whole period since the last Self Study. The
ICLP group is headed by the Associate Dean for International and Comparative Law John Reitz,
on a quarter-time basis.
In addition, the Law School currently has ten other full-time faculty members with interests and
expertise in international and comparative law matters, ranging from international human rights
law and international intellectual property rights law to cultural property law or comparative and
international family law11 and at least four visitors and adjuncts who have regularly contributed
course offerings to ICLP.12 The participation of this broader group of faculty members (known
as the “ICLP-2” faculty) enriches the international and comparative course offerings with a wide
range of special courses reflecting their special interests. Finally, students and faculty gain
international exposure from a wider array of foreign visitors who visit for a single session or
semester,13 as well as from the number of foreign scholars who choose to spend their research
leaves at the Law School.14
10
Professors Jonathan Carlson, Enrique Carrasco, Marcella David, Mark Osiel, John Reitz, Mark Sidel,
Alexander Somek, Lea Vandervelde, and Adrien Wing.
11
Professors Patricia Acton, David Baldus, Willard Boyd, Steven Burton, William Buss, Ann Estin, Mark
Janis, Nicholas Johnson, Wendie Schneider, and Tung Yin.
12
Alexander Domrin (from Russia), Sir Geoffrey Palmer (from New Zealand), Chris Rossi (from the
United States), and Burns Weston (from the United States, an emeritus professor at Iowa, and a founding member
of the program in international and comparative law at Iowa).
13
See Table 2-4 at the end of this section on ICLP. In addition, Professor Stephen Legomsky, while not a
foreign law professor, is a leading American professor of immigration law. He visited the College as a
distinguished visitor for the Fall semester, 2005.
14
Since the fall of 2000, the College has hosted research scholars from the following countries (numbers
indicated in parentheses): Italy (1), Japan (1), Kyrgyzstan (1), Moldova (1), Nigeria (2), People‟s Republic of
China (8), Republic of South Korea (9), Romania (1), Serbia (1), Turkey (1), Ukraine (3), Uzbekistan (1),
Venezuela (1). Some stayed for three to six months; most stayed at least one academic year. Many have been in
programs that specifically required mentoring on the part of a member of the College of Law faculty. That role
has typically been provided by Associate Dean John Reitz.
35
The College=s impressive commitment to international studies has been diminished in recent
years by a form of internal Abrain drain.@ Of the nine faculty at the core of ICLP, three – not
counting Professor Reitz – have taken or are about to take on substantial administrative duties,
either within the College or the wider University, so that they will either not be teaching at all or
will teach only half-time.15 As a result, the College has been able to continue to offer a robust
international and comparative curriculum in recent years only through use of visitors and
adjuncts. The international courses which are most difficult to cover each year and for which
there is steady demand are international trade law (WTO law) and immigration law. There is
thus a strong need to hire regular tenured or tenure-track professors with teaching and research
interests in these areas.
In addition, there is a continual need to identify new foreign law professors who might be
interested in visiting at Iowa for a year, a semester, or an even shorter period of time to teach
Iowa students. For purposes of exposing Iowa students and professors to foreign law thinking, it
is more efficient to bring a foreigner to Iowa than to send Iowa students or faculty abroad. While
both foreign study and study with foreigners are important parts of any international curriculum,
bringing foreign colleagues to Iowa City will thus necessarily remain an important part of ICLP.
Simply because of its size, Iowa cannot afford a large program of visiting foreign law professors,
and there are a few visitors who have shown their loyalty and dependability by visiting on a
regular basis. But both because their situations could change and also because it is desirable to
gain the stimulation of new faces, the College must constantly look for new candidates for a
visit.
Finally, for a discussion of the need for at least a part-time, non-faculty administrator for both the
LL.M. program and for other parts of ICLP, see Section O below on the LL.M. degree.
For faculty and student research, the Law School Law Library has a priceless collection of over
165,000 hard-copy volumes of international, comparative, and foreign legal materials. This
collection is the product of a commitment to collecting international materials that has been
sustained over generations. For example, the core of the College=s rare books collection was a
gift of approximately 1,000 volumes of foreign and comparative legal scholarship from the
private collection of the College=s first dean, William Gardiner Hammond. The rare book
collection currently comprises over 7,500 volumes, devoted principally to British common law
and Nineteenth Century German and French legal writing. In addition to the rare books, the
international and comparative materials in the Law Library include extensive collections of all
British and Commonwealth legal systems, English-language literature on public international
15
Since July 2006, Professor Marcella David has begun serving full-time as Associate Provost for
Diversity and Special Assistant to the President for Equal Opportunity and Diversity and therefore has not been
available for any teaching in the ICLP curriculum. Professor Jonathan Carlson will serve as the new Associate
Dean for Academic Affairs upon his return from a Fulbright in Portugal at the start of the Spring semester, 2007.
In the fall of 2006, Professor Adrien Wing began serving as the Associate Dean for Faculty Development. For
both Carlson and Wing, their administrative capacity is intended to be half-time, so their curricular offerings will
accordingly be cut in half. In effect, ICLP has lost two full professors in the last few years.
36
law and on the European Union and other supranational organizations, and substantial
collections of contemporary French, German, Mexican, and Argentinean law in the languages of
those countries, as well as English-language literature on the laws of many other foreign
countries. The hard-copy collection is supplemented by large microfiche collections, including
all publicly available United Nations documents, League of Nations and GATT-WTO documents
and major collections of human rights documents, and also by electronic data bases containing
substantial amounts of foreign and international legal materials. See Chapter 6 Law Library for
further detail.
2. Curriculum
The extent of the College=s international and comparative law course offerings is illustrated by
the offerings from the last full academic year, 2005-2006. Introduction to Public International
Law, Comparative Law, and Human Rights in the World Community are open to qualified
graduate and upper division undergraduate students, as well as to law students.
37
INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE LAW CORE COURSES
2005-2006
First Summer Session 2005 (May 17-June 24)
660:823 Arcachon Program
Introduction to the Law of France & the European Union
Human Rights in the World Community
Comparative Constitutional Law
Adrien Wing
Michael Amado
Adrien Wing
Alexander Somek
Second Summer Session 2005 (June 27-Aug. 5)
91:225 Comparative Law in Post-Communist Countries
Alexander Domrin
August Intersession 2005 (Aug. 15-22)
91:227 Comparative Constitutional Law (starts in intersession)
91:341 Managing National Security
Sir Geoffrey Palmer
Jamie Baker
Fall 2005
91:224
91:227
91:236
91:266
91:246
91:285
91:260
91:193
91:195
91:282
91:291
91:307
91:273
91:431
91:420
91:460
91:605
91:633
91:683
Comparative Law
John Reitz
Comparative Constitutional Law (begins Aug. intersession) Sir Geoffrey Palmer
Contemporary Russian Law in Historical Context
Alexander Domrin
European Union Law
Alexander Somek
Family Law in the World Community
Ann Estin
Foreign, Comparative and International Legal Research
Mary Sexton
Foreign Relations
Alexander Domrin
Adrien Wing
Introduction to Public International Law
Mark Osiel
International Business Transactions
Enrique Carrasco
International Environmental Law
Jon Carlson
Law in the Muslim World
Adrien Wing
Public International Finance
Enrique Carrasco
Jessup Moot Court Team
Staff
Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems Journal
John Reitz
Law Study Abroad at Bucerius (Germany)
John Reitz
Advanced Problems in International Environmental Law: Jon Carlson
Trade & Environment Seminar (year long)
International Criminal Law Seminar
Mark Osiel
Rethinking Public International Law Seminar
Alexander Somek
Spring 2006
91:228 Conflicts of Law
91:295 International Commercial Arbitration
91:195 Introduction to Public International Law
91:430 Jessup International Moot Court Competition
91:420 Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems Journal
91:505 UI Center for International Finance Development Tutorial
38
Christina Bohannan
Steven Burton
Marcella David
Staff
John Reitz
Enrique Carrasco
660:824 London Law Consortium
91:605 Advanced Problems in International Environmental Law:
Trade & Environment Seminar (year long)
91:618 Cultural Property Seminar
Patricia Acton
Jon Carlson
Willard Boyd/Richard
Koontz
91:612 Employment Discrimination in Global Perspective Seminar Jill Gaulding
91:606 Advanced Problems in International Business & Economic Alexander Somek
Relations: Regional Integration & International Trade
Seminar
91:655 Law of War Peace and Military Affairs Seminar
Mark Osiel
91:663:1 Problems of International Law Seminar
Chris Rossi
91:663:2 Problems of International Law: Human Rights
Burns Weston
Law & Policy Seminar
In view of their fundamental importance as gateway or core courses in the international and
comparative area, the College seeks to offer the following ICLP courses every year:
Introduction to Public International Law, Human Rights in the World Community, Comparative
Law, International Business Transactions, and International Trade Law. Some of the other
international and comparative courses that have been offered multiple times since January 2000
include:
European Union Law
Law in the Muslim World16
Rethinking Public International Law (Seminar)
International Criminal Law (Seminar)
Foreign Relations Law
International Environmental Law
Private International Finance
International Commercial Arbitration
Some faculty members believe that the existing curriculum treats international and comparative
law too much as a course of study for students aiming at specialization. Economic globalization
has developed so extensively that virtually any lawyer – even in a modest general civil practice –
can expect to run into problems with international dimensions. Plausible arguments can be made
that most lawyers need to know something about foreign and international law. The ICLP
faculty has discussed whether it should create a general gateway course, but it has not yet done
16
While Law in the Muslim World combines study of Islamic law with coverage of international law and
human rights issues raised by some aspects of Islamic society and law, as well as the non-Islamic aspects of modern
legal systems in Muslim countries, starting in academic year 2006-07, the Law School is also cross-listing the
course “Comparative Islamic Law,” taught by Professor Ahmed Souaiaia in the Department of Religious Studies.
Professor Souaiaia is an expert in the field of Islamic law and focuses his course exclusively on the various
competing legal schools within the Islamic law tradition. Cross-listing permits law students to take the course
without having to count it against the six credits outside the College of Law that law students are normally allowed
to count toward graduation. Cross-listing was adopted based on the recommendation of Professor John Reitz, who
audited the course in the fall of 2005.
39
so. The Strategic Plan states that the ICLP faculty will continue to “consider creating a gateway
course for the fields of international and comparative law.”
While the majority of the ICLP courses and seminars are taught in the manner traditional for
U.S. law schools, some of the international and comparative law courses have involved creative
experimentation with course format. A number of the international and comparative law courses
have had an interdisciplinary format. Introduction to Public International Law, Comparative
Law, and Human Rights in the World Community generally have been open to honors
undergraduates and to graduate students outside the College. Professor Reitz developed a course
on Democracy and the Rule of Law with a professor in the Political Science Department, and the
two of them have co-taught the course in an interdisciplinary manner to both law students and
honors undergraduates. The course was last taught in the Spring 2000 semester. Professor
Enrique Carrasco has worked with students in a number of courses or seminars to develop an
innovative web site concerning international finance which is described below (the AE-Book@).
See Chapter 3, Section E.
Students with specialized interests in the international and comparative law fields additionally
may earn academic and writing credits by writing for the international law journal
TRANSNATIONAL LAW AND CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS described below in Section E.4. They
may also register for Independent Research and Writing or a Tutorial in these fields; for the
Philip C. Jessup International Moot Court Competition; and for up to six credit hours of
internationally and comparatively oriented courses and seminars offered by the University
outside of the Law School.
3. Study Abroad
Opportunities for study abroad are an important part of any substantial program of international
and comparative law. The College offers its students three different types of opportunities: a
summer program in Arcachon, France; an opportunity to study during the fall semester at
Bucerius Law School in Hamburg, Germany; and a spring semester in London in the program
that Iowa offers together with six other ABA-accredited law schools. These are each described
below in Section N.
4. Student Research and Writing Opportunities in ICLP
Students especially interested in international and comparative law have the opportunity to write
notes and comments on that subject for any of the College‟s four journals. However, the journal
TRANSNATIONAL LAW AND CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS (TLCP) was specifically founded to
provide students a forum to explore their interests in international and comparative law topics. A
somewhat different kind of opportunity to write in the ICL field is offered by the University of
Iowa Center for International Finance & Development (UICIFD), an innovative web site
collaboratively created and maintained by Professor Enrique Carrasco and a group of law
students at the University of Iowa Law School. See Chapter 3, Section E.
40
5. Human Rights Externships
In 2005-2006, the Law School began to explore the development of a program of human rights
externships for law students in the summer with non-governmental organizations or
governmental or international agencies. One possibility the College has considered has been to
develop these externships in conjunction with the University of Iowa Center for Human Rights
(UICHR). However, the untimely death in the spring of 2006 of the director for UICHR,
coupled with the denial in the summer of 2006 of the NRC proposal, and the uncertainty about
the Law School‟s overall externship program, has temporarily disrupted that planning.
Nevertheless, externships in the human rights field offer an exciting way to encourage students
to pursue careers in the international field, so there is strong faculty support for pursuing this
idea. However, in order to enable students to participate, it will undoubtedly be necessary to
raise funds to provide at least partial financial support for travel and living expenses, especially if
the externships are to be located on either of the coasts or abroad. It will also be necessary to
develop a suitable incentive system for faculty to supervise these externships.
6. Ukrainian Initiative
In the fall of 1999, the University of Iowa won a major grant from the Department of Education
to promote stronger ties with Taras Shevchenko National University (TSNU) in Kyiv, Ukraine,
and the Law School was one of the chief participating units from the University of Iowa. The
three- year grant was renewed once, so it finally expired in 2005. The focus of the grant was to
send UI faculty members to teach short courses at TSNU. The Law School chose to affiliate
itself chiefly with the Law Faculty at the Institute for International Affairs of the TSNU because
students and faculty there are generally competent in English. Over the six years of the grant,
three different faculty members from the College taught for substantial periods (three to four
weeks at a time),17 and approximately four faculty members from TSNU visited Iowa for varying
periods of time up to one semester to audit courses, work on their research and teaching
materials, and give guest lectures under the general mentorship of designated Law School faculty
members. Although the government funding for this project has ended, the College=s
participation has helped to internationalize its own faculty, and the College seeks new
opportunities for international engagement for its faculty.
7. LL.M. Degree Program
A major component of the ICLP is the College=s LL.M. Degree in International and Comparative
Law, which is discussed below in Section 0 of this chapter. Because the LL.M. degree program
brings foreign-trained lawyers to Iowa and because, for the most part, they pursue their degree
by taking part in courses in the regular J.D. curriculum, the LL.M. program provides a rich
resource for J.D. students interested in international and comparative law.
17
Professor Alan Widiss taught in Kyiv once, just before his untimely death. Jonathan Carlson taught
twice, and John Reitz taught in three different years in Kyiv.
41
8. ICLP Summary Data
The following Table 2-4 provides some summary information regarding the ICLP program.
TABLE 2-4: ICLP SUMMARY DATA 1998-2005
Academic Year
Starting in Summer. 1998
1999
2000 2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
No. of ICLP
Courses18
15
29
29
33
No. of Faculty
(ICLP-1)
8
10
10
10
No. of Faculty
(ICLP-2)19
18
24
24
24
No. of Foreign
Visitors
Teaching20
2
1
3
3
6
4
4
2
No. of Foreign
Visiting
Scholars
3
2
5
4
5
5
6
7
18
This count of the number of ICLP courses offered at Iowa does not include the three international and
comparative courses which are offered every summer in the Arcachon program or the comparative and
international courses which may be offered as part of the London program.
19
The ICLP-1 faculty are the core faculty for ICLP and are listed in Section 1 above. The ICLP-2 faculty
includes all of the professors in ICLP-1, plus the faculty listed above.
20
Most of the visitors have taught during the summer, but Sir Geoffrey Palmer usually has taught a short
course at the beginning of a semester for a short time, and Professors Alexander Domrin and Alexander Somek
(before he joined our faculty permanently), visited for entire academic semesters. The numbers of foreign visitors
teaching at the Law School do not include one foreign visitor who teaches every year in the Arcachon program in
France (for the past several years, Michaël Amado).
42
No. of Iowa
Students in
Study Abroad
Programs:
Arcachon
21
London
22
Bucerius
18
7
--
23
9
--
19
7
--
44
8
--
39
9
3
44
11
0
42
8
2
44
6
0
F. Special Strength of Iowa Curriculum: The Innovation, Business & Law
Program
The Innovation, Business & Law Program grows out of an effort to integrate antitrust, corporate
and securities law, and intellectual property. Five professors who focus on these areas of law
provide the core faculty for the program.23 The program also builds on the scholarly
achievements of the JOURNAL OF CORPORATION LAW, which has long been published at Iowa and
was the first student-published law journal specializing in corporate and related areas of law.
The curriculum for the Innovation, Business & Law Program is organized around two focus
areas: (1) Intellectual Property & Competition Law; and (2) Corporate & Securities Law. The
courses and seminars for each focus area are set out below. The Program has facilitated
externships at the Australian Centre for Intellectual Property in Agriculture and on the Supreme
Court of Delaware. The latter externship is supervised by Delaware Supreme Court Justice
Randy Holland, who also regularly offers mini-courses at Iowa as an adjunct professor.
1. Intellectual Property & Competition Law Focus Area
The Intellectual Property & Competition Law Focus Area prepares students for practice in all
areas of intellectual property law and antitrust law. Intellectual property law embraces the areas
of patents, copyrights, and trademarks and unfair competition, as well as aspects of arts and
entertainment law. Intellectual property law seeks to promote innovation by providing
innovators with a legal mechanism to earn a return on their investments in innovation or
creativity while enriching the public domain. Antitrust law seeks to promote competition and
innovation by ensuring that markets remain competitive and innovators have a fair opportunity to
enter them. Iowa=s Intellectual Property & Competition Law Focus Area recognizes and builds
on the complementary nature of these disciplines.
Core Courses
Antitrust: Legal and Economic Analysis
21
Number of students for the London program include only Iowa students registered for the program.
Students come to that program from all of the other consortium member schools, as well.
22
The Bucerius exchange program started in the fall of 2002. The first German student to come to Iowa
under that exchange arrived in the fall of 2006.
23
Professors Herbert Hovenkamp, Hillary Sale, Mark Janis, Christina Bohannan, and Ethan Stone.
43
Antitrust Law
Antitrust Policy
Arts and Entertainment Law
Copyright
Introduction to Intellectual Property Law
Patent Law
Trademark and Unfair Competition Law
Core Seminars
Advanced Topics in Intellectual Property
Federal Antitrust Policy Seminar
Innovation, Business and Law Seminar
Patenting Complex Technologies
Associated Courses
Corporations
Law of Electronic Media
Securities Regulation
Takeovers, Mergers, and Acquisitions
Associated Seminars
Cultural Property
Cyberspace Law Seminar
2. Corporate and Securities Law Focus Area
The Corporate and Securities Law Focus Area prepares students to deal with legal issues arising
in a range of business organizations. Some courses – like the corporations course – deal with
fundamental issues arising in virtually any commercial context, and will be of interest to nearly
all Iowa students. Other courses are more specialized, and call for a more rigorous background
in accounting principles and economics.
Core Courses
Corporate Governance and Control
Corporations
Law and Accounting
Securities Regulation
Core Seminars
Advanced Topics in Corporate Law Seminar
Corporate Law Practicum
Associated Courses
Antitrust: Legal and Economic Analysis
44
Antitrust Law
Antitrust Policy
Copyright
Health Care Fraud and Abuse
International Intellectual Property Law
Introduction to Intellectual Property Law
Patent Law
Trademark and Unfair Competition Law
Associated Seminars
Advanced Topics in Intellectual Property
Federal Antitrust Policy Seminar
The Strategic Plan (Goal 2, Theme 5) states that the Law School will “continue to develop an
internationally-recognized program of instruction in innovation, business, and law,” by exploring
curricular innovations and by expanding co-curricular opportunities. The College will also
support scholarly research in this field though a “range of mechanisms, including academic
symposia and similar programs.”
G. Upper Level Legal Analysis, Writing, and Research
1. Faculty-Supervised Writing Experiences
The legal writing program is a special feature of the Law School‟s curriculum, and reflects a
commitment to support and encourage students in the development of their legal writing skills.
In addition to the first year LAWR program described in Section C above, all upper level
students must earn additional upper level writing credits in order to graduate. Students who
began prior to August, 2006, must complete an additional five hours of writing credits in order to
graduate, one of which includes Appellate Advocacy I. With the re-structuring of the first year
writing program, and the inclusion of an appellate advocacy experience in the first year, students
starting in August, 2006 and after must earn four upper level writing credits. For both groups of
students, two of the writing credits must be earned under direct faculty supervision through
participation in clinic, seminars, independent research, or tutorials. Work done in co-curricular
programs, including moot court and journals, does not qualify as a faculty-supervised writing
experience.
Writing credits may be awarded for a variety of writing experiences. The Law School‟s policy
provides: “Faculty have the discretion to award upper level writing units for any substantial
analytical writing experience, whether the primary mission of the writing project is legal
advocacy; the analysis and criticism of legal doctrine, theory or policy; the presentation of
original research in law or related fields; or the drafting of legal documents.” The general rule is
that one writing credit can be awarded for “each 20 pages of double-spaced typewritten text,
exclusive of footnotes.” Student work for a writing credit is subject to a re-write requirement.
45
The following shows how the May, 2006 graduates earned their writing credits:
TABLE 2-5 MAY 2006 GRADUATES – EARNED WRITING CREDITS
Course
Number
193
196
210
213
219
225
234
264
267
299
304
309
325
357
400
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
415
420
425
430
431
455
500
501
502
503
Course Name
Child Maltreatment Juv Justice Welfr Syst
Appellate Adv I
Business Reorganizations
Civil Proc Pre-Trial Theory & Practice
Comprtv Law in Post-Communist Countries
Commercial Contract Drafting
Survey British & Commonwealth Lgl Hist
Legal Externship
Genetics
Law in Asia in Transition
Law and Economics
Philanthropy & Law
A Survey of Gender Work and the Law
Iowa Law Review
Moot Court Board
Chicago Moot Court Team
Van Oosterhout Moot Court Competition
Baskerville Moot Court Competition
Clinical Law Program-Internship
Clinical Law Program-Externship
National Moot Court Competition
Journal of Corporation Law
Transnatnl Law & Contempry Probs Journal
Journal of Gender, Race and Justice
Jessup Internatnl Moot Court Competition
Jessup Moot Court Competition Team
Health Law and Policy Practicum
Independent Research Project
Directed Research & Writing
Supplementary Writing
Writing Tutorial
46
Number of
Students
1
2
182
2
17
2
15
1
4
3
4
5
8
5
33
19
4
29
30
9
8
6
30
23
22
22
2
2
31
3
8
4
Total
Units
1
3
182
2
17
3
15
1
8
3
5
5
12
8
66
19
4
29
30
15
14
6
60
46
44
22
2
3
56
4
12
8
504
505
601
603
604
605
606
612
618
624
626
627
628
630
632
633
639
643
646
647
648
654
655
656
658
659
660
661
662
663
665
668
674
680
683
690
Tutorial
UI Center Intl Finance Dvlpmnt Tutorial
Advanced Topics in Corporate Law
Capital Punishment Seminar
Patent Prosecution Seminar
Adv Problems in Int‟l Environmental Law
Adv Prob Internat Business & Econ Relat
Employment Discrim in Global Perspective
Cultural Property
Federal Antitrust Policy
Seminar Gender and Sexuality in U.S. Law
History of Crime and Punishment
History of the Legal Profession
Higher Education and the Law
International Criminal Law
International Human Rights & Child Labor
Freedom of Speech Seminar
Non-Profit & Philanthropic Organizations
The Law of the Frontier: U.S. 1820-1870
Law and Development
Law Politics and the Family
Law of War, Peace, and Military Affairs
Labor Standards Legislation
Seminar on the First Amendment
Law & Lawyers in Literature
Medical Tutorial for Law Students
Legal Issues: Intercollegiate Athletics
Problems in Int‟l Law & Policy Resch Sem
Problems of International Law
Natl Sec Law & Govt Powers in Emergencies
Mental Health Seminar
Poverty Law
Supreme Court Seminar
Rethinking Public International Law
Transnational Business Disputes
Transfer
Total Number of Units
1
2
2
9
8
2
7
8
22
5
11
6
5
3
7
7
1
3
25
5
1
4
2
3
7
7
7
8
2
4
1
1
4
1
3
2
2
2
4
4
20
16
3
11
11
37
8
22
8
8
6
11
11
2
5
44
5
2
8
4
3
14
14
11
14
4
5
2
1
8
2
4
5
3
1047
Of the 1047 writing credits earned by the May, 2006 graduates, 404 (or 39%) were earned in
classes and seminars, fifty-six (or 5%) were earned in independent research, thirty-seven (or 4%)
were earned in clinic and externships, and thirty (or 3%) were earned in tutorials or other faculty
47
supervised experiences. The remainder, or just under half, were earned in Appellate Advocacy
and co-curricular activities including journals and moot court competitions.
2. Academic and Writing Credit in Student-Run Organizations
a. Journals
Students begin as writers in student-run organizations in the fall semester of the second year.
Each student writer must write one student note of at least twenty pages of text and twenty pages
of endnotes, and complete all office hours and authority check requirements. Student writers
receive two hours of academic credit and two hours of writing credit for the academic year. The
Note and Comment Editors work with the student writers in developing a topic, edit drafts, and
meet with each writer to discuss the progress of the Note. The Note and Comment Editors
review final drafts, and make a recommendation as to whether the Note meets established
standards. The Note is then read by the faculty advisor to make a determination as to whether
the Note is credit-worthy; the faculty member makes the final determination as to whether or not
to award credit.
LAW REVIEW
During the 2005-06 academic year, there were thirty-seven second year writers. Each student
must complete fifty office hours during each of the two semesters of membership. In addition,
students must participate in mandatory authority checks on articles being prepared for
publication. There were sixteen Board members. The Board members receive academic credit
for the work that they perform: the Editor-in-Chief receives four credits, the senior editors
receive three credits, and the associate editors receive two credits. The journal publishes
approximately six issues per year.
JOURNAL OF CORPORATION LAW
During the 2005-06 academic year, there were thirty-one second year writers. Each writer must
complete thirty-five secondary hours, including authority checks and other journal-related
projects. There were sixteen Board members. The Board members receive academic credits as
follows: Editor-in-Chief, four hours; senior editors, three hours; and associate editors, two
hours. This journal publishes four issues per year.
TRANSNATIONAL LAW & CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS
In addition to seminars and independent writing opportunities in the field of international and
comparative law, the College offers interested students an opportunity to write and edit for a
48
specialized journal, TRANSNATIONAL LAW AND CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS (TLCP). TLCP is
modeled after Duke University‟s interdisciplinary and symposium-oriented LAW AND
CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS. TLCP now publishes three issues per year and is edited by students
and faculty working jointly. The editorial board is chosen from the student body, with faculty
and scholars from inside and outside the College serving as “guest editors” of each symposium
issue. At the urging of the student editors, the Journal has begun publishing at least one issue
each year composed of submissions it has received in place of the symposium format.
During the 2005-06 year, there were twenty-two second year writers, and twelve Board
members. TLCP writers must complete a minimum of thirty hours each semester. The senior
editors receive three hours of academic credit and the associate editors receive two hours of
credit.
JOURNAL OF GENDER, RACE & JUSTICE
During the 2005-06 year, there were twenty-nine second year writers, and twelve Board
members. Second year students must complete thirty-five office hours each semester, including
authority checks and other journal-related tasks. The senior editors receive three hours of
academic credit and the associate editors receive two hours of credit. The journal publishes twothree issues per year.
b. Moot Court
For all classes beginning prior to August, 2006, students complete Appellate Advocacy I in the
first semester of the second year. Under the program as it has been operated, the first drafts of
briefs are read and edited by the “student judges” involved in the moot court program. The
student judges meet with each of the writers to review the briefs. The student judges can require
a re-write of the first draft. The briefs are then read by one of the many faculty members who
participate each year in the moot court program. The faculty judge may require a re-write of the
brief, and makes the determination as to whether or not credit will be awarded. For classes
beginning with August, 2006, the appellate advocacy experience has been moved into the
LAWR program in the first year.
Last year, there were thirty-three Moot Court board members who received credit for their
participation, nine of whom served on the executive board. The chair and other members of the
executive board receive two academic credits and one writing credit. The three problems editors
receive two academic credits and two writing credits. The preparation of the problems and the
“bench memo” are supervised by a faculty reader. The student judges receive two academic
credits and one writing credit. The student judges critique written work of students participating
in AAI and AAII, and judge oral arguments.
Students receive one hour of academic credit and one hour of writing credit for Appellate
Advocacy II, which is an elective extension of AAI. The brief problems are written by Case
Editors, who are third year students on the Board. The final brief is reviewed by a student judge
and a faculty judge, who makes the final determination regarding crediting.
49
There are numerous competitive moot court opportunities, all of which are modeled after the
Van Oosterhout Competition. It consists of second semester second-year students who were
among the top participants in AA1, but it has the same basic requirements as AAII, and awards
the same academic and writing credits. Those students who performed well in AAI are eligible
to participate in the program, which is limited to thirty-two students. The four students
participating in the final rounds become the National Moot Court Team. The Baskerville
Competition is a second competitive opportunity. The winners form the Chicago Moot Court
team. There is also the Jessup International Moot Court Competition; the winners can advance
to regional and international competitions.
There is a faculty supervisor for the moot court program who advises the Board. The faculty
advisor consults on the administration of the program, and advises the competitive moot court
teams.
With the changes in the appellate advocacy curriculum, the role of the Moot Court board will
need to be modified. The Board will continue the administration of the upper level competitive
program, but there is on-going discussion about whether it will be involved in the first year
appellate advocacy program, which will now be taught by the LAWR faculty.
H. Writing Resource Center
The Law School‟s Writing Resource Center is a vital part of the College‟s commitment to
helping students to be effective legal writers. The College established the Center in 1989 to
provide writing assistance to all members of the Law School community. The Center provides
one-on-one tutorial assistance for writers working on course assignments, journal articles,
writing samples, briefs, and other writings. Students come to the Writing Center both through
self-referral and by recommendation by faculty. The Center Director also provides workshops
for journal staff, as well as workshops on grammar and style for first year students. The focus of
the Center‟s work is on presentation – rhetorical, stylistic, and grammatical concerns – rather
than content.
The Director of the Center, who began shortly after its inception, is Dr. Nancy Jones, Ph.D. She
has more than 25 years of experience teaching writing at undergraduate, graduate, and postgraduate levels. Her doctorate is in English with a concentration in the teaching of writing. The
Center also employs four part-time, temporary professional staff (FTE = .97 for 2006-07). The
Center has an on-going relationship with the Iowa Writer‟s Workshop, and has had the good
fortune to employ a series of accomplished lawyers working on M.F.A.‟s in the Writer‟s
Workshop. The Center also employs four research assistants as tutors.
The great majority of students work with the Writing Resource Center at some point in their time
in law school, as evidenced by the following tables. Roughly 80% of the students in the first-year
class work with the Center, and most of them have multiple tutorial sessions. The number of
sessions has increased steadily since the last Self Study.
50
TABLE 2-6 PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS BY GRADUATING CLASS TUTORED IN
THE WRITING CENTER DURING THEIR LAW SCHOOL YEARS 2000-06
Year of Graduation
% Tutored
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
67
80
82
79
81
79
90
TABLE 2-7 PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS BY CLASS TUTORED IN THE WRITING
CENTER 1999-2006
Year
L1
L2
L3
Total
99-00
00-01
01-02
02-03
03-04
04-05
05-06
75
79
80
81
87
80
84
38
41
38
26
26
23
32
9
19
13
11
13
14
9
40
46
45
42
41
40
43
TABLE 2-8 NUMBER OF TUTORING SESSIONS IN THE WRITING
CENTER 1999-2006
Year
Fall Session
Spring Session
Total
99-00
00-01
527
514
329
375
856
889
51
01-02
02-03
03-04
04-05
05-06
591
741
713
717
737
422
402
408
461
452
1013
1143
1121
1178
1189
The scope of the working of the Center will need to be re-considered in light of the new LAWR
Program. The Center has had a strong tie to the small section program. With the addition of
legal writing instructors working with 1Ls through the LAWR program, it is expected that fewer
1Ls will use the Center‟s resources. In anticipation of this drop, temporary professional staff
was reduced from 1.75 FTE in the 2005-06 year to .97 FTE for the current year. The Director
reports a drop in tutorial sessions of about 25% in the fall of 2006, but notes that the Center has
not been able to meet all of the demand for assistance.
I. Professional Skills Instruction
In the broadest sense, all courses taught contribute to the professional skills of the students. The
use of the phrase Aprofessional skills courses@ is not intended to suggest that other courses have
little or no practical utility. To the contrary, the skills learned in traditional courses taught in the
first year – the skills of critical reading and oral and written argumentation, for example – are
absolutely essential to everyone who engages in the practice of law. The phrase is used in this
report, however, in the same sense in which it is used by the ABA. As stated by the ABA, Athe
teaching of professional skills involves teaching and evaluating law student performance on live
cases or problems, or in simulation of the lawyers= role, for the mastery of basic lawyering skills,
and the better understanding of the professional responsibility, substantive and procedural law,
and the theory of legal practice.@
1. Clinical Programs
a. Introduction
Clinical legal education has been a part of the Law School‟s curriculum since 1972, when the
first in-house clinic was established. The Law School has offered experiential learning through
clinics for some time: the in-house clinic, located on the third floor of the Law School;
externships with various governmental and non-profit offices in Iowa City, Davenport, Cedar
Rapids, and Des Moines; and judicial externships in the federal courts in Iowa, and the Illinois
Court of Appeals. All clinical courses include a classroom instructional component. Clinical
courses are available throughout the year. In the May 2006 graduating class of 230 students,
eighty-four (37%) had taken clinic for at least one semester.
b. Eligibility for Clinic
52
Students may enroll in clinical courses after three semesters of law school. This three semester
requirement tracks the Iowa Supreme Court rule relating to student practice which allows law
students to appear and participate in matters after three semesters.24 The federal district courts in
Iowa and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals also allow student practice after three semesters of
law school.
Students may receive up to fifteen hours of credit in clinical courses throughout their time in law
school. The majority of positions allow up to nine hours of credit in the first semester. The
positions located in Des Moines allow up to fifteen hours of credit (two of which are based on an
independent study paper of forty pages). Some positions are capped at six hours of credit.
c. The Selection Process
The selection of students for in-house clinic positions and externships is done through a lottery
system. Students are allowed to enter the lottery for any of the positions available, using a
preference system. For most positions, a selection preference is given to students who sign up
for the maximum number of credits available.
The clinic does not give priority to upper level students in its lottery. However, the clinic is
committed to accommodating students in the last semester of law school who have participated
in prior lotteries but have not obtained a position. While the great majority of students who want
a clinical position during law school will be able to participate if they enter the lottery in multiple
semesters, participation in a particular semester, particularly the spring, is not guaranteed.
The number of students participating in the lottery for the last three years is set out in Table 2-9
at the end of Section I.1 below. The sign-up for the spring semester exceeds the slots available
24
Iowa Supreme Court Rule 31.15 provides:
31.15(1) A law student enrolled in a reputable law school as defined by rule 31.8 and Iowa Code section
602.10102 certified to the supreme court of Iowa by the dean of the school to have completed satisfactorily not
less than the equivalent of three semesters of the work required by the school to qualify for the J.D. or LL.B.
degree, may, under the following conditions, engage in the practice of law or appear as counsel in the trial or
appellate courts of this state.
a. Appearance by students as defense counsel in a criminal matter in any court shall be confined to misdemeanors
and shall be under the direct supervision of licensed Iowa counsel who shall be personally present.
b. Appearance by students in matters before the court of appeals or supreme court of Iowa shall be under the direct
supervision of licensed Iowa counsel who shall be personally present.
c. Appearance by students in other matters shall be under the general supervision of licensed Iowa counsel, but
such counsel need not be present in court unless required by order of the court.
31.15(2) A student who the dean certifies has completed not less than the equivalent of two semesters of work
required to qualify for the J.D. or LL.B. degree may appear in a representative capacity in a contested case
proceeding before an administrative agency. Appearance by students who have completed only two semesters of
work shall be under the direct supervision of licensed Iowa counsel who shall be personally present.
31.15(3) No student may engage in the practice of law or appear as counsel in any court of this state or before an
administrative agency unless such practice or appearance is part of an educational program approved by the
faculty of the student‟s law school and not disapproved by the supreme court of the state of Iowa, and such
program is supervised by at least one member of the law school‟s faculty.
31.15(4) A student shall not receive compensation other than general compensation from an employer-attorney or
from a law-school-administered fund.
53
for both the in-house clinic and externships, and a significant portion of interested students are
not able to get a position. In the fall, far fewer students participate in the lottery, and generally
students can obtain a position in one of the settings. The three semester prerequisite has
contributed to the imbalance in student demand between fall and spring semesters B there are
roughly twice as many students eligible for clinic in the fall as there are in the spring. Students
also report that they are busier with other activities in the fall, including job interviewing, and
that the classroom offerings are richer in the fall than in the spring.
The sign-up for the summer clinic is generally lower than in the spring and fall. The state of the
job market appears to be a factor in student interest in the summer. The majority of students in
the summer clinic are students who started in the summer program. Students who begin law
school in May are eligible for clinic in the following year. The number of students starting law
school in the summer of 2006 was significantly less than in past years, and it is anticipated that
the clinic will have a lower than normal enrollment in the summer of 2007. If the summer class
remains small in future years, the clinic may need to make some significant changes in summer
offerings.
One change that might offer a more balanced demand for clinic slots between semesters would
be to allow participation by 2Ls in their first semester. The Iowa student practice rule allows
appearances by students in matters before administrative agencies after two semesters of law
school. Such a change might be logistically difficult given the clinic‟s integrated model.
Moreover, there are concerns as to whether two semesters is sufficient preparation prior to
undertaking client representation.
d. In-House Clinic
1. The Law Firm
The work of the in-house clinic is supervised by six full-time clinical faculty. The clinic
operates on a law firm model. While the faculty have particular subject matter areas in which
they work, students are assigned cases in two or more areas and generally work with several of
the clinic faculty through the course of a semester. The substantive areas include general civil,
immigration, consumer, domestic violence, civil rights, criminal, disability rights and policy, and
employment. Students are asked to indicate in advance their preferences as to subject matter,
and the clinic staff will accommodate these requests to the extent possible given existing case
obligations. The number of students participating in the in-house clinic is set out in Table 2-10
at the end of Section I.1 below.
The law firm model affords students the opportunity to work with more than one clinician and
thus see more than one lawyering style. Likewise, students gain exposure to more than one
substantive area, as well as different courts and agencies. It does represent challenges, however,
that may not be as evident in single subject clinics used in many law schools. For example, the
task of learning the substantive law and procedure involved in immigration while at the same
time learning criminal law and procedure can be daunting to students. In order to support the
students in their acclimation to the particular substantive areas, the clinic divides into substantive
54
working groups that meet weekly. These weekly meetings include lectures on substantive law
and procedure as well as case reviews. These work groups have fostered collaboration among
the students within the groups, with students sharing forms, research, and ideas about how to
approach a problem.
The case mix in the clinic tends to be litigation-oriented, and affords fewer opportunities for
transactional experiences. For several years, Richard Koontz supervised the representation of
various non-profit entities. Because of his increased responsibilities in the Law School=s NonProfit Center, Professor Koontz is no longer able to supervise clinical cases. The loss of the nonprofit caseload decreased the number of transactional opportunities. In addition, following the
bankruptcy reform, the clinic stopped representing individuals in consumer bankruptcies, and
lost this source of cases with transactional elements. There are, nonetheless, significant
opportunities to work outside of a litigation context. The work of Professor Sandler, for
example, in advising community organizations and doing policy advocacy, provides experiences
outside of the litigation context. Professor Sandler also continues to provide representation in
estate planning matters. Moreover, some cases in a litigation setting, like dissolutions, have a
transactional character.
Students are offered a wide range of professional experiences working in a broad range of
substantive areas. In any given semester, a student may engage in any or all of the following real
life experiences: interviewing, counseling, drafting of litigation and non-litigation documents,
courtroom advocacy, negotiation, brief writing, oral argument, policy advocacy before
lawmakers, and public presentations. Accompanying this skills training is teaching geared
toward the mastery of doctrine, research and legal analysis, professional responsibility, and
reflective lawyering.
The clinic faculty has endeavored to provide a case mix that includes both relatively simple cases
as well as more complex litigation. With this mix, students might have cases for which they
assume primary responsibility, and operate relatively autonomously (albeit with supervision), as
well as more complex cases where they might have responsibility for discrete portions of a case
but assume more of a co-counsel role with the clinical faculty. Both types of cases provide vital
learning experiences.
The clinic also has contributed significantly to the Law School=s and the University=s service
mission. It provides many high-quality legal services to under-served populations.
2. Infrastructure and Support
The clinic has two support staff. The two clinic secretaries have a broad range of
responsibilities, including answering the telephones, reception, mail, file management,
monitoring student schedules, setting up group meetings, administrative/financial (including
maintaining the trust account and handling office expenses), document preparation, initiating and
conducting the lottery, fielding questions from students regarding office systems, making travel
arrangements, and intake screening. The clinic has had the good fortune of stability in these
55
positions. Were these duties to be taken over by persons with less experience, significantly more
supervision effort would need to be expended by clinic faculty.
The offices of the clinic are located in room 386 (the Aclinic suite@), and the adjoining room
which is used as computer room and library. There has been an on-going concern (cited, for
example, in the last Self Study) about the configuration of the clinic space. At the time of the
move to the current law building, the clinic had a focus on prison conditions and post-conviction
cases. The majority of the clinic=s clients were residing in correctional facilities. Thus, there was
not a great need for conference areas to meet with clients, nor was there a significant need for a
reception area. In the last twenty years, there has been a significant shift in the nature of the
work conducted by the clinic. Client meetings are now frequent. In addition, the work group
model discussed above requires conference space as well. Thus, there is not sufficient
conference space.
In addition, there is no reception or waiting area for clients of the clinic. Upon arriving at the
clinic, clients must walk through student work space to reach the clinic secretaries= office. The
clinic=s two conference rooms are accessed through student work space as well.
There are thirty-two carrels in the clinic suite, three of which are dedicated to office equipment.
Space is at a premium in the suite, and there currently is no possibility of increasing the amount
of student work space. This serves as a practical cap on clinic enrollment.
There is on-going discussion within the Law School=s building committee about the need for the
re-configuration of the clinic space. The clinic staff has met with the chair of the committee to
discuss needs. Addressing the space needs of the clinic has been identified as a priority,
although it is clear that there are competing space needs within the building. The issue was
addressed in the most recent strategic plan, which calls for Alooking to ways to reconfigure clinic
space both to expand the number of students who could participate in the in-house clinic and to
improve the setting for the delivery of legal services.@
The clinic has experienced a significant increase in recent years in the number of clients who are
not proficient in English. In part, this is a product of specific projects, including the immigration
work done by the clinic, and an intake project through the New Iowan Center in Muscatine,
Iowa. This has led to an increase in the need for interpreters, particularly those who speak
Spanish and French. It is expected that this need will continue, and the clinic will need to
continue to consider how to meet this need in a dependable, predictable manner.
The clinic currently has adequate computer access for students. The majority of students now
come with laptops, and students have wireless access to the computer network. The clinic also
has several desktop computer stations available for student use. The clinic has acquired
AbacusLaw, a law office management program, which includes a conflict check function and an
information database regarding clients. The clinic will need to explore other law office software,
such as case planning software and other technology that is commonplace in the modern law
office.
56
The clinic=s operating expenses other than salary (e.g., litigation expenses, case-related travel,
telephones) have been paid in large part through external support. For the past several years, the
clinic has had a contract with the Iowa Program for Assistive Technology to do case and policy
work. The contract funds come from a federal grant. There was a significant reduction in that
funding last year. While there are sufficient funds to meet current operating expenses, further
cuts in this external support could threaten the ability to continue certain activities vital to the
clinic=s mission.
e. Externships
Clinical externships are coordinated by Professor Patricia Acton. She supervises the majority of
non-judicial externships in the fall and summer. In the spring semester, Professor Acton is the
on-site director of the Law School=s London Program, and members of the clinical faculty
supervise those externships with which they do not have conflicts. The judicial externships are
supervised by Adjunct Lecturer Linda Neuman, a former justice of the Iowa Supreme Court.
She began her supervision of judicial externs last year. Some externships are supervised by nonclinical faculty members in the spring in situations where the in-house clinic staff have conflicts.
The number of students participating in the externship program is set out in Table 2-10 at the end
of Section I.1 below.
The current externship offerings include:
Student Legal Services, Iowa City
City Attorney, Iowa City
Iowa Legal Aid, Cedar Rapids
HELP Legal Aid, Davenport
Federal Public Defender, Cedar Rapids
Kids First, Cedar Rapids
Youth Law Center, Des Moines
Iowa Attorney General, Des Moines
US Attorney, Southern District of Iowa, Des Moines and Rock Island, IL
Judge Robert Pratt, U.S. District Court, Des Moines
Magistrate Judge Celeste Bremer, U.S. District Court, Des Moines
Magistrate Judge John Jarvey, U.S. District Court, Cedar Rapids
Judge Paul Kilburg, Bankruptcy Court, Cedar Rapids
Justice Tom M. Lytton, Illinois Appellate Court, Rock Island, IL
The Law School supervisors meet weekly with students to review their on-going work and to
encourage reflection regarding their experiences. The supervisors monitor the placements to
make sure that the students are getting a true clinical experience (and not just working in the
library), that the supervision is good, and that the students are exposed to high-quality legal
work. The placements have been relatively stable over time, so that the Law School supervisors
have good relationships with the on-site supervisors. Offices that are interested in establishing a
new externship are asked to submit a written proposal that outlines the nature of the work to be
performed, and the nature of the supervision that will be provided. A committee composed of
57
three clinicians periodically reviews all of the externship offices. A review is planned for 20072008.
The possibility of shifting one of the in-house faculty to coordinator of the externship program
was an option identified in the last Self Study. This shift has been accomplished and it has
brought greater coherence and uniformity to the administration of the program. The
coordinator=s regular review of offices, including personal visits, has aided in the clear
communication of expectations and objectives of the program. The coordinator visits offices
each semester, and asks that other faculty supervisors visit offices in the semester during which
she is away.
The addition of a supervisor for the judicial placements has relieved significant logistical
problems that had existed for some time. In the spring, as many as eight non-clinical faculty had
been called upon to supervise externships. Last spring, arrangements were required for only
three externships.
The addition of a judicial externship supervisor has also allowed for a shift in the focus of the
classroom component for judicial externships. The focus of the classroom component had been
on lawyering skills, and did not have direct relevance to the experiences of the judicial externs.
The current classroom seminar focuses on issues directly related to the role of a law clerk,
opinion writing and judicial administration.
f. Classroom Component
Each first-semester student in both the in-house clinic and the non-judicial externship program
participates in the classroom component of the clinic. ASmall group@ is the clinic faculty=s shorthand way of describing the simulation-based skills training that students receive. Over a period
of eight weeks, the students are assigned readings and roles for lessons in interviewing,
depositions, case planning, counseling, and negotiation. Each group ends with an observation of
a trial, and a discussion of what the class observed.
Beginning with the 2005-06 academic year, students in the judicial externships participate in a
classroom seminar developed specifically for those working in a judge=s chambers. The readings
and discussions relate specifically to the experiences in a judicial setting.
g. The Clinical Faculty
The seven members of what is denominated the clinical faculty include, in alphabetical order,
Patricia Acton, John Allen, Lois Cox, Reta Noblett-Feld, Leonard Sandler, Barbara Schwartz and
John Whiston. The clinical faculty has been very stable; their tenure at the college ranges from
thirty years to twelve years. There has been no change in their ranks since the last Self Study.
They are also very experienced as practitioners; the least experienced graduated from law school
in 1984.
58
Prior to this year, the members of the clinic faculty were categorized by the University as
Professional and Scientific employees. Each had attained Acareer status,@ and had job security
under University policies. This year, the clinical faculty opted to convert to the University=s
clinical track, which is an academic track without tenure. Under University policy, a clinical
faculty member is appointed to a long-term contract which must be periodically reviewed
following faculty evaluation. The differences in job description and job security between the
former Career Status and Clinical Faculty status with job security are small, and all appear to
operate to the advantage of the clinic‟s faculty, who sought the change. See Chapter 3, Section
H.3 for more discussion of Clinical Faculty status.
The role of the members of the clinical faculty in faculty governance is addressed by College
policy. They have full voting privileges except for the hiring and tenure decisions for tenuretrack faculty. Clinical faculty have served on the entire range of faculty committees, with the
exception of Appointments. The last Self Study observed: AGiven the prominence of the hiring
process in the intellectual and social life of the college, it may now be time, for the first time
since 1987, to re-examine the continued exclusion of the clinical faculty from this important
activity.@ In fact, this issue has not been re-examined in the interim.
The clinical faculty continues to teach outside of the clinic. Since the last Self Study, they have
taught Commercial Transactions, Arts and Entertainment Law, Trusts and Estates, Immigration
Law, Asylum and Refugee Law, Trial Advocacy, Poverty Law, Notable American Trials of the
20th Century, Evidence, and Workers= Compensation.
59
TABLE 2-9
CLINICAL LAW PROGRAM LOTTERY SIGN-UP 2003-06
2003/2004
# interns
# externs
2004/2005
# interns
# externs
2005/2006
# interns
# externs
Fall 2003
25
36
Fall 2004
16
20
Fall 2005
15
19
Spring 2004
47
Summer 2004
36
61
52
Spring 2005
52
Summer 2005
25
62
32
Spring 2006
53
Summer 2006
24
60+ (missing U.S. Attorney
lottery results)
60
36
Annual Total
108
149
Annual Total
93
114
Annual Total
92
115
TABLE 2-10
INFORMATION ON CLINICAL LAW PROGRAM 2003-06
2003/2004
Total
# interns
total credit hours
Fall 2003
Spring 2004
Summer 2004
Annual
31
197
32
207
20
174
83
578
# externs
total credit hours
14
129
17
139
15
123
46
391
total interns/externs per year
total credits/year
45
326
49
346
35
297
129
969
2004/2005
Total
# interns
total credit hours
Fall 2004
Spring 2005
30
204
33
230
14
126
77
560
# externs
total credit hours
10
87
18
161
11
90
39
338
total credits/year
40
291
51
391
25
216
116
898
Spring 2006
Summer 2005
Summer 2006
Annual
2005/2006
Total
# interns
total credit hours
Fall 2005
Annual
21
117
27
204
12
104
60
425
# externs
total credit hours
11
79
16
132
8
60
35
271
total credits/year
32
196
43
336
20
164
95
696
2. Skills Training Outside the Clinic
For purposes of clarity, this section is divided into sections dealing with: (1) the mandatory skills
training we have required through our Appellate Advocacy I program and that we are now
61
requiring through our LAWR program; (2) courses primarily devoted to skills training, taught by
faculty (including adjuncts) and open to all students; (3) courses primarily devoted to skills
training, taught by faculty (including adjuncts) and open to students on the basis of student-run
competitions; (4) skills teaching through student-run, faculty-supervised co-curricular activities;
(5) courses secondarily devoted to skills training, taught by faculty and involving very significant
drafting; and (6) other courses taught by faculty and involving some measure of drafting or, e.g.,
problem-based negotiations.
a. Mandatory Skills Component: Appellate Advocacy
Appellate Advocacy I (student-run, faculty-supervised; entire class)
Throughout the period under review, all students who have entered the Law School prior to Fall
2006, have been required to participate in this appellate advocacy program, run by students and
supervised by a member of the faculty. The program is designed to give second-year students a
chance to prepare and argue an interrelated question of law and fact in an adversarial setting and
to familiarize them with brief writing and citation form, to further develop research skills, and to
strengthen their persuasive ability in oral argument at the appellate level. In September, student
advocates begin a ten-week process of researching and brief writing which culminates in oral
presentations of their arguments. Student advocates work in two-person teams representing the
appellants or appellees. Each student advocate receives a case record of the lower court‟s
proceedings. Each student is assigned one issue to brief and argue. They then identify and
research the issues, write an appellate brief, and argue the case before a panel of judges that
includes students, a faculty member, and a lawyer or judge from outside the Law School. AAI is
graded pass/fail with each participant receiving one writing credit and one semester hour of
academic credit. Apart from the feedback that is provided by faculty panelists on the brief and
oral argument, instruction is provided by student members of the Moot Court Board.
The Revised Curriculum: Appellate Advocacy Taught by Faculty in the Spring of the First Year
Effective in the fall of 2006, the faculty significantly revised its first-year program and
incorporated into the faculty-taught first year curriculum certain of the training and practice in
appellate argument that was previously handled through the student-run Appellate Advocacy I
program just described. According to those revisions, each student in both semesters of her first
year is enrolled in a Legal Analysis, Writing & Research class (roughly 20 students taught by our
LAWR faculty) and in a Small Enrollment section of one of the conventional first-year courses
(roughly thirty students taught by our regular faculty).
The spring semester LAWR course requires “two writings on a factual problem requiring close
legal analysis” and, in both cases, there is a required rewrite. One of these writings shall be in
the form of an appellate brief and shall provide the basis for an oral presentation in the form of
an appellate oral argument. At the discretion of the faculty, the oral presentation may be graded
or pass/fail.
62
The fall semester small section courses require an oral exercise that asks students to explain legal
concepts in “plain English” (e.g., in a simulated client-counseling session). The spring semester
small section courses will require “an oral exercise that is aimed at developing skills in one or
more of the following areas: (a) factual investigation; (b) counseling; (c) negotiation; (d) oral
advocacy; or (e) other fundamental lawyering skills.” All of these small section oral exercises
will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis.
These changes to the first year curriculum were taken to strengthen, among other things,
instruction in appellate advocacy skills in the first year. For this and other academic reasons, the
student-taught Appellate Advocacy program in the first semester of the second year has been
made voluntary.
b. Courses Primarily Devoted to Skills Training, Taught by Faculty (including
Adjuncts) and Open to All Students
In this category of courses taught by the faculty and devoted to skills training, we have offered:
Trial Advocacy (2 credits, adjuncts, 52 offerings since the fall of 2000, 728 students); Mediation:
Theory and Practice (3 credits, Professor Gittler, 10 offerings, 132 students); Interest-Based
Negotiations (3 credits, Professor Gittler, 4 offerings, 55 students); and Negotiations (3 credits,
Professor Wetlaufer, 9 offerings, 387 students). We have also offered courses in Advanced
Arbitration (adjunct, 2 offerings, 19 students); Client Counseling (offered five times, Professors
Emily Hughes, Elizabeth Jacobi, 80 students); Alternative Dispute Resolution (offered once
2004-05, Professor Brinig, 14 students); and Interviewing and Counseling (offered once, 200102, Professor Peters, 22 students). Neither of the last two courses are currently offered.
c. Courses Primarily Devoted to Skills Training, Taught by Faculty, and Open to
Students on the Basis of Student-Run Competition
Stephenson Trial Advocacy Team (Professor Whiston) 1-2 credits, 32 students per year
Competitors in the Stephenson intramural trial advocacy competition may receive one academic
credit for participation. The competition takes place in October and includes the presentation of
at least two full trials by teams of two students. Finalists in the competition represent the Law
School at a regional and national trial advocacy competition with additional credit available.
Professor Whiston provides students in this program with about fifty hours of direct instruction.
d. Skills Teaching through Student-Run, Faculty-Supervised Co-Curricular
Activities
A substantial proportion of our skills training is done through student-run, faculty-supervised
“co-curricular” activities. These activities run in four tracks and involve varying levels of
faculty involvement that could fairly be called “instruction.” These tracks are: (1) Trial
Advocacy Program, Stephenson Competition and Stephenson Team; (2) Appellate Advocacy
Program, Van Oosterhout and Baskerville Competitions, Chicago and National Moot Court
Teams; (3) Jessup International Moot Court Competition; and (4) Client Counseling Program.
63
All of these programs provide an opportunity to perform relevant skills; most involve preperformance instruction by students who have previously participated in the program; and all
provide instruction in the form of feedback on student performances from faculty or participating
judges or practitioners.
Trial Advocacy Program, Stephenson Competition
The Trial Advocacy Program is a student-run, faculty-supervised program that provides
opportunities for students to develop and refine skills used in the preparation and trial of civil
and criminal cases. It is open to all students, including those who have not taken the Trial
Advocacy Course described above. Each year, thirty-two students are enrolled, assigned to twoperson teams, and asked to twice prepare and conduct a trial, first for one party and then for the
other. Such trials are conducted before two judges, one a State District Court Judge and the
other a local practicing lawyer. The twelve top performers in that first round try the case again,
as finalists, before a panel of Federal District Court Judges. The six highest performing finalists
than become members of the Stephenson Trial Advocacy Team described above.
Appellate Advocacy, Van Oosterhout and Baskerville Competitions, Chicago and National
Teams
Appellate Advocacy I (all students)
This student-run, faculty-supervised program has been described above. Effective in the fall of
2006, certain of the skills training functions served by this program have been incorporated into
the faculty-taught first-year curriculum and this Appellate Advocacy program will be voluntary
effective fall 2007.
In the spring semester of their second year, students who excelled in Appellate Advocacy I are
given the opportunity to participate in one of the college‟s three intramural moot court
competitions: the Baskerville Competition, the Van Oosterhout Competition, and the Jessup
Competition. The winners of these competitions are then invited to represent the college (during
their third year of law school) as members of moot court teams that compete with other schools
in regional, national, and international tournaments.
Van Oosterhout Competition (thirty-two students per year)
Participants in Van Oosterhout Memorial Moot Court Competition are chosen from among those
students who demonstrated superior ability in writing and arguing their Appellate Advocacy I
problem. This competition consists of no less than two evenings of oral argument. On the first
evening, students argue the side and issue that they briefed. On the second evening, students
argue the same issue, but from their opponent‟s side. Advocates advance individually and will
be re-paired if need be for successive rounds. The top six students from Van Oosterhout with the
highest combined brief and oral argument scores will comprise the Iowa National Moot Court
Team for the fall semester of the following academic year. The top two scoring students will also
perform oral arguments before the Iowa Supreme Court during the Law School‟s Supreme Court
64
Day held in the fall semester. One hour of academic credit and one hour of writing credit will be
awarded to those who successfully complete the Van Oosterhout program.
Baskerville Competition (thirty-two students per year)
The Baskerville Competition is limited to thirty-two advocates (top scores thirty-three to sixtyfour following Van Oosterhout selection). A proportional number of students are selected from
the fall and summer classes – typically, but not always, twenty-eight from fall and four from
summer. The competition is a single-elimination tournament, ending in a final round in which
four advocates will argue before a distinguished panel of judges. Baskerville consists of no less
than two evenings of oral argument. On the first evening, students argue the side and issue that
they briefed. On the second evening, students argue the same issue, but from their opponent‟s
side. The top four advocates from the Baskerville Competition will form the Chicago Moot
Court team for the following year. The top two advocates from the Baskerville Competition will
perform oral arguments before the Iowa Supreme Court during the Law School‟s Supreme Court
Day held in the fall semester.
National Moot Court Team (Professor Schantz; one credit, six students per year)
Open to six finalists in the Van Oosterhout Moot Court Competition described above. Students
participate as the Law School‟s representatives in the Regional Moot Court Competition in the
fall of their third year, and judge intramural Moot Court Competitions in the spring semester.
Chicago Moot Court Team (Professor Schantz; one credit, six students per year)
Also open to six finalists in Van Oosterhout Moot Court Competition described above. Students
participate as the Law School‟s representatives in the Chicago Moot Court Competition in the
fall of their third year, and judge intramural Moot Court Competitions in the spring semester.
Jessup International Moot Court Competition (one credit, thirty-two students per year)
The Law School‟s intramural international law moot court competition is held each spring
concurrently with the college‟s other moot court competitions. Following completion of the
intramural competition, two to five competitors will be chosen from the top finishers to represent
Iowa as its team for the Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition. The Jessup team
prepares memorials (briefs) during the fall and attends a regional tournament in February. The
winning regional team advances to the international tournament, held in Washington, D.C., in
late March or early April.
Client Counseling (offered ten times between the fall of 2000 and the fall of 2006 to a total of
190 students)
The Law School Client Counseling competition is held in the spring to determine the two-person
team to represent the University of Iowa in the regional Client Counseling Competition
sponsored by the Law Student Division in cooperation with the Young Lawyers Division of the
American Bar Association. The winners of the college competition receive one academic credit.
65
e. Courses Devoted to Skills Training, Taught by Faculty, and Involving Very
Significant Drafting
Civil Procedure Pre-trial Theory and Practice (Professor David), one credit
This course provides an opportunity for students to consider, in depth, the law of pleadings and
other pretrial matters touched upon in the basic Civil Procedure class. In addition to considering
decided cases, students will consider hypothetical scenarios typical of a case as it develops from
the interview stage to the pleading stage and early pretrial stage. Students will gain practical
experience by actually drafting pleadings and motions relevant to the hypothetical.
Citizen Enforcement of Environmental Laws Seminar (Professor Stensvaag), four credit seminar
This seminar explores the implementation of a novel and experimental feature of modern
environmental statutes: the citizen suit. The core of the course is the simulated initiation and
defense of fictitious citizen suits, in which students form two-person teams of attorneys. Each
team is given raw materials appropriate for commencing a citizen suit concerning, e.g., the
alleged violation by an industrial facility of its NPDES permit under the Clean Water Act. At the
appropriate point in the course, each team will also be assigned to defend one of the alleged
violators.
During the course of the semester, each two-person team prepares and submits approximately
seven documents (or groups of documents), including: (1) an opening strategy memo sketching
out the proposed prosecution of the citizen suit and anticipating the legal issues that must be
researched and addressed; (2) a complaint (and instructions describing how it is to be served); (3)
a defense strategy memo charting the proposed contours of the defense; (4) an answer (coupled
with any defensive motions); (5) the plaintiff‟s strategic response to the answer and to any
defense motions; (6) counter-motions designed to bring the litigation to a definitive ruling (for
example, motions for summary judgment, accompanied by affidavits); (7) papers opposing the
summary judgment motion; and (8) a motion for attorney fees. Several of the most significant
documents are submitted in draft form, reviewed by the instructor in team conferences, and
rewritten. Each team is required to submit something in writing during most weeks of the
semester. The instructor will review and make comments on each draft, and will provide a grade
for each of the final written products. Students completing the seminar will receive four graded
academic credits (with the grade based primarily on the written products), including three writing
units.
f. Other Courses Taught by Faculty and including Some Measure of Drafting or
Problem-Based Negotiations
The following courses, not primarily devoted to skills training, have been identified by faculty as
involving some measure of skills training: Patent Prosecution, Professor Janis; Philanthropy and
Nonprofit Organizations, Professors Boyd and Sidel; Advanced Topics in Corporate Law,
Professors Stone (seminar); Law and Technology, Professors Bezanson and Kurtz (seminar);
66
Commercial Contract Drafting, Professor Sparks (adjunct); Estate Planning, Professor Morf
(adjunct); and Federal Criminal Practice, Professors Williams and Berry (adjuncts).
g. Conclusion
The College‟s Curriculum Policy Committee is in the second year of a two-year examination of
our Skills Training Curriculum. The work of that committee is informed by the recent
amendments to ABA Curriculum Standard 302(a)(4) and includes a detailed assessment of our
current offerings (including the strengthening of the first-year component and the balance among
our skills offerings), surveys of the faculty on their readiness to strengthen offerings in this area,
and surveys of students concerning their interests and needs. Based on its conclusion that the
Law School can and should do better in this area, the committee is developing a set of
recommendations and policy proposals that will be submitted for faculty consideration. Insofar
as the committee is seeking to assure compliance with Standard 302(a)(4), its work is
complicated by what some regard as the ambiguities with which that Standard has been drafted.
There is also some concern that further development of skills training should avoid privileging
litigation skills over all other professional skills. For students entering before Fall 2006,
Standard 302(a)(4) appears to be met by the required Appellate Advocacy I course described
above.
J. Externship Programs25
In addition to the externship opportunities available through the Clinical Law Program, described
above at Section I.1, students may independently arrange externships through the Committee on
Curriculum and Externships. These externships involve working without pay for a governmental
agency or non-profit group. Except in exceptional circumstances, the organization for which the
student works during the externship should be beyond the geographic reach of the Clinic. Except
for a few very well-established externship programs in which the faculty has strong confidence,
externships are limited to a total of six credit hours. As a result, very few students seek approval
for externships except during the summer. The student is required to have an on-site supervisor
from the organization hosting the externship and also a faculty supervisor. Students are expected
to confer regularly with both supervisors. The external supervisor is asked to make an
educational commitment to the student, to share work in progress with the faculty supervisor, to
consult with the faculty supervisor periodically during the externship, and to submit a written
evaluation of the student at the end of the externship. The student is expected to consult
regularly with the faculty supervisor – normally, by telephone – during the externship, usually at
least on a weekly basis. The student is further required to work at least 50 hours per credit and,
in addition, to submit at the end of the externship a research paper equivalent to one for which
two academic credits would normally be given. Externships are ungraded except for the two
25
In its November 27, 2000 action letter, ABA‟s Accreditation Committee concluded that the College of
Law was not in compliance with Standard 305(f) concerning periodic review and approval of field placement
programs. However, by action of the Accreditation Committee in January, 2001, conveyed to the College by John
A. Sebert‟s letter of February 19, 2001, the Committee concluded that the additional information provided by the
then-Dean N. William Hines established that the College is in full compliance with ABA standards. The relevant
correspondence is included in the Appendices to this chapter as Appendix 2-8.
67
credits which carry the grade that the faculty supervisor assigns to the paper. The current
Externship Policy, which sets out the College=s rules for externs, is included as Appendix 2-7.
Table 2-11 the end of this section shows the relatively light use that students have made of nonclinical externships. At present, one of the greatest hurdles the student wishing to arrange one of
these externships faces is finding a faculty supervisor. The faculty supervision of these
externships, especially those in the summer, is mainly done on an overload basis. Moreover,
many faculty are gone during the summer, and most of those in residence in Iowa City at that
time are either teaching according to the rather intense summer schedule or are trying to conduct
research and writing. Professors thus face a positive disincentive to agree to serve as supervisor.
The two-credit research paper also adds to the disincentive, especially if the student has already
completed the required upper level writing requirement. However, the required paper can satisfy
the requirement for at least two credits of writing supervised directly by a professor.
The new ABA rule requiring a site visit for all externships for four or more credits may prove to
be an even bigger obstacle to students interested in externships of more than three credits.
As an experiment, during the summer of 2006, the Dean appointed one professor to supervise up
to eight externs in return for payment at the regular summer rate.26 In the fall of 2006, the
Curriculum Committee has been following up on that experiment by considering various
amendments or supplements to the Externship Policy. The faculty needs to decide whether it
wants to amend its rules to the extent permitted by the ABA rules to promote externships or
whether it prefers to continue to discourage them. In the recent Strategic Plan, the faculty
affirmed its commitment to the idea of increasing student opportunities to have high quality
externships, so it will continue to work on this issue.
TABLE 2-11 NON-CLINICAL EXTERNSHIPS 1998-2005
Calendar
Year
1998
1999
No. of
Students:
Spring
--
1
Summer
--
7
Fall
0
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
0
1
1***
5*
5*
5**
11****
1
3
2***
* One externship was for 3 credits only.
** Two externships were for 3 credits only.
*** One externship was for 10 credits.
**** Three externships were for 3 credits only.
26
Professor Jonathan Carlson served as that faculty supervisor.
externship, Professor Carlson in fact supervised only seven externships.
68
Because one student dropped the
K. Accelerated Program and Summer Sessions
1. Accelerated Program
The College offers two starting dates to entering students, May and August. The May entrants
have been dubbed “summer entrants.” The summer program has functioned for many years as
an accelerated program, allowing students to graduate in less than three full academic years.
Under current rules, students may complete their course of study over three summers and two
full academic years – a period of twenty-seven months.27
For the past several years, the target for the May class has been thirty students. In May, 2006,
only eighteen students began in May. This was the result of a change in the manner in which the
class was filled. In the past, the May and August classes were filled separately, with admission
offered to a specific starting time. For 2006, students were admitted and then asked to choose
between the two start dates. The yield for the summer class was lower than anticipated. The
College plans to return to past practice in the manner in which the classes are filled.
The acceleration of the program occurs through the compression of the first year curriculum.
The summer entrants are able to complete all but one of their first year courses in the summer
and fall terms. The students who began in May 2006 will complete their first year courses as
follows:
TABLE 2-12 CURRICULUM FOR MAY 2006 ENTRANTS
Summer 2006
First Session
Second Session
Fall 2006
Spring 2006
Course
Intro to Law & Legal Reasoning
Contracts & Sales
Property I
Torts
Contracts II
Property II
Criminal Law
Con Law I
Civil Procedure
Instructor
Raymond
Carrasco
w/Ruskell
de la Torre
McLay
Anderson
Hines
Tomkovicz
Matsumoto
Stensvaag
Cr.
1
5
3
3
3
3
3
5
4
The graduation requirements, including mandatory courses and writing, and hours of instruction,
are the same for May and August starters. While the programs of the two groups have been
functionally equivalent, apart from the compression of the program, there has been one
difference with respect to Appellate Advocacy I (AAI). The summer starters have done their
27
Until 2005, the Law School‟s policy regarding graduation requirements stated that a student must
“satisfy ABA residence requirements.” In practice, from the late 1990s until 2005, summer entrants were required
to complete three summers and 2 ½ regular academic years prior to graduation over a total of thirty-one months. In
2005, in response to the recent ABA rule change permitting a minimum course of study of twenty-four months, the
College adopted its current rule setting forth a minimum course of study of twenty-seven months.
69
moot court appellate brief and oral argument experiences in the fall in connection with their
small section course. This participation satisfies the AAI requirement, although it is not
separately credited as is it is for fall starters. Because there is not a separate AAI course for
summer starters, they undertake one less writing experience than those starting in the fall. They
do, however, receive more intensive faculty involvement with the preparation of the brief than
would ordinarily occur with AAI.
The class that started in May 2006 is the last group that will operate under the small section
writing program that the College has employed for many years. Like the fall starters in 2006,
students starting in May, 2007, will participate in the new LAWR program. A determination has
not yet been made with respect to the timing and other details of the LAWR program for summer
entrants.
A key to the accelerated program is the availability of summer and intersession courses. The
College schedules a broad range of classes during intersession and summer. See Section K.2
below.
Accelerated students are able to participate in the various co-curricular activities within the Law
School. For example, the Moot Court program currently has three summer entrants serving as
board members. Summer entrants participate as student writers on the College‟s four journals.28
Accelerated students participate in the various trial advocacy and moot court competitions.
Accelerated students are also involved in student government and organizations. The Iowa
Student Bar Association has representative positions specifically designated for summer entrants.
The Law School is undertaking to review the accelerated program as called for in the College‟s
Strategic Plan. The Internal Procedures committee has been charged with reviewing the program
for the purpose of developing a recommendation as to whether the summer entrant program
should be continued or eliminated. Over the years, concerns have been expressed that the
compressed start disadvantages students. Moreover, there are very few students who actually
take full advantage of the acceleration available. Of the twenty-seven students who began in
May, 2004 and who remain students (three left school), only five completed their studies by
August, 2006 (twenty-seven months), an additional twelve will graduate in December (thirty-one
months), and the remainder expect to complete their studies in May, 2007. Under current rules,
students beginning in August can complete their studies in December of the third year (a course
of study of twenty-eight months), so the summer start yields very little advantage in terms of the
total time required to complete the course of study. In fact, three students who began in August,
2004 will complete their studies in December, while eight students who had begun in August,
2003 finished their studies in December, 2005. Nonetheless, there have been students who have
strong reasons for wanting to complete the course of study in as short a time as possible. The
28
Accelerated students cannot serve in board positions on the journals unless they “decelerate.” Students
are not eligible for board positions unless they have served previously as student writers. The journals require
students to commit to board service for an entire academic year. Summer entrants are eligible to be student writers
in the fall of the second academic year, and thus cannot serve in a board position unless they commit to remaining
through the following (or a third) academic year.
70
perception has been that the accelerated program has offered numerous “non-traditional”
students the opportunity to study law.
The summer start has allowed the Law School to make fuller use of its facilities and faculty
throughout the year. The summer program has offered significant additional teaching
opportunities for the faculty, although it has been difficult at times to staff the summer offerings.
The financial implications of ending the program will need to be considered alongside the
pedagogical concerns.
2. Summer Sessions
The Law School offers classes during two sessions during the summer, as well as week long
classes during the May and August intersessions. The summer sessions have provided enriched
offerings for all students. Each summer three first-year courses along with Introduction to Law
& Legal Reasoning are offered to entering first-year Accelerated Program students.
Additionally, a variety of upper-level courses are offered. These upper-level offerings include a
number of courses that would be “high enrollment” courses when offered during the academic
year, such as Evidence and Constitutional Law II, as well as a selection of other more specialized
courses. Summer courses are taught by regular faculty as well as visitors. For the 2006 summer
session and intersessions, the following courses were offered with enrollments in each course:
71
Summer 2006
May 2006 Intersession (starts May 8)
91:239
Corporate Governance & Control
91:341
Managing National Security
91:410
Client Counseling
91:504:39
Prosecution Intern Tutorial
91:370:5
Trial Advocacy
Instructor
Holland
Baker
Hughes
McGuire
Jarvey, Lindahl
Credits
1
1
1
1
2
Enrolled
24
13
18
9
29
1
5
18
18
Wing
Wing
Amado
Palmer
Wing
Jones/Wolfe
Buss
Stensvaag
Carlson
Staff
Staff
Staff
Staff
Staff
6
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
arr.
arr.
arr.
arr.
arr.
35
Second Session
Summer Entrants (Monday, June 26-Friday, August 4)
91:132
Property I
91:364
Torts
deLaTorre
McLay
3
3
17
17
Upper Class
91:241
Corporations I
91:196
Juv Delinquency & Juv Justice System
91:225
Cmprtv Lw in Pst-Communist Countries
91:198
Advanced Legal Research
91:267
Legal Externship
91:406
Clinic-Internship
91:407
Clinic-Externship
91:500
Independent Research
91:504
Tutorial
Huss
Bandstra
Domrin
Potter/Klugh
Staff
Staff
Staff
Staff
Staff
4
3
3
2
arr.
arr.
arr.
arr.
arr.
32
5
6
6
8
12
8
2
1
August 2006 Intersession (starts August 14)
91:370:1 Trial Advocacy
91:328
Presidential Power
91:343
Corporate Control & Shareholder Democracy
Spies
Larsen
Pritchard
2
1
1
14
21
6
First Session
Summer Entrants
91:102
Intro to Law & Legal Reasoning
91:120
Contract & Sales I
Upper Class (Tuesday, May 16 - Friday, June 23)
660:823
Arcachon Program
Law in the Muslim World
Intro to French and EU Law
Tutorial
91:198
Advanced Legal Research
91:232
Constitutional Law II
91:265
Evidence
91:228
Conflict of Law
91:267
Legal Externship
91:406
Clinic-Internship
91:407
Clinic-Externship
91:500
Independent Research
91:504
Tutorial
Raymond
Carrasco w/Ruskell
72
21
13
21
45
6
8
12
8
1
1
91:308:1
Professional Responsibility
August Orientation
August Orientation
August Orientation
Neuman
Cain
Bauer
Love
1
1
1
1
44
71
67
65
Additionally, the Law School offers its Arcachon Program, in Arcachon, France. The program
is open to English speaking students and graduates. Last summer, thirty-five students
participated in the program. The course offerings in 2006 were Law in the Muslim World,
Introduction to the Law of France and the European Union, and Comparative Constitutional
Law.
The summer session classroom courses (i.e., excluding clinic, externships, and independent
study) for 2001-05 are set out in Attachment 2-1. The summer program affords the Law School
an opportunity to become acquainted with visiting faculty from other schools who might not
otherwise be able to visit Iowa because of other commitments. These visitorships allow our
faculty and students to interact with accomplished faculty from other schools. The diversity of
courses in the summer has been an essential component of the Accelerated Program.
The College will need to consider the effect on the summer program were the College to
terminate the Accelerated Program. It appears that non-accelerated students make up a good
portion of the students attending summer classes. Accelerated students have made up between
12% and 16% percent of total enrollment in upper-level classes. This is roughly equivalent to
the percentage of summer entrants in the student body. In certain classes, however, summer
students have made up a significant portion of the enrollment (for example, clinic).
L. Pro Bono Opportunities
Since the time of the last Self Study, the Iowa Student Bar Association (student government)
instituted the Pro Bono Society, and, in 2004, renamed the program the Boyd Service Award, in
honor of Professor and President-Emeritus Willard “Sandy” Boyd. The ISBA Philanthropy
Committee governs membership criteria and determines which students receive the award by 100
hours or more of qualifying volunteer service. The Law School administration provides support
to this program. The Career Services “Symplicity” software is being used to call students‟
attention to service opportunities in the greater Iowa City Community. Plans are underway to
staff a Civic Engagement/Service Learning Program within the next academic year. There are
also opportunities for students to become involved in pro bono work through the Larned A.
Waterman Non-Profit Center. See Chapter 3, Section E.
M. Evaluation of Scholastic Achievement
The Introduction to Law class is graded on a pass/fail basis, and each student receives
individualized feedback on the final exam. All other first year courses are graded, and most
upper level courses are also graded. The Law School has no general policy allowing students to
take some courses on a pass/fail basis. It is, however, true that after that orientation experience
73
there is relatively little use of examinations for post-exam learning. Very few students make the
effort to go over their exams systematically with professors. Indeed, the circumstances of law
school do not favor such learning. Professors are typically grading exams after students have left
the campus for Winter Break after the fall semester or Summer Break after the spring semester.
By the time the students return, they have moved on to other concerns and other courses and may
have forgotten the nuances of the courses in which they took examinations at the end of the
previous term. Professors are willing to meet with students who seek them out to discuss their
exams, but most professors do not post model answers or offer general exam feed-back sessions
after the grades have been turned in. At the same time, it should be noted that the Academic
Achievement program sponsors exam feedback sessions for all first year students after they have
received their Fall semester grades.
While most grades are based solely on the student‟s performance on the final examination,
faculty may take class participation into account. In seminars, grades are based largely or solely
on a research paper. Some other upper level courses may have graded exercises that also count
toward the final grade.
For many years, the Law School used a unique numerical grading scale that ran from 55 (the
lowest failing grade) to 60 (the lowest passing grade) to 75 (the required median grade in firstyear courses) to 92 (the highest grade, almost never awarded). Several years ago, students began
to complain that the College‟s scale was disadvantaging them in job searches because the Iowa
grades looked low by comparison to grades from the many schools that use a 100 point scale and
higher medians. In any event, the Iowa scale was complicated to explain, so in November, 2005,
the faculty adopted a new grading scale as follows:
4.3-4.2
4.1-3.9
3.8-3.6
3.5-3.3
3.2-3.0
A+
A
AB+
B
2.9-2.7
2.6-2.4
2.3-2.1
2.0-1.8
1.7-1.5
BC+
C
D
F
Along with the new grading curve, the faculty also adopted a mandatory grade distribution for
all first-year classes and all upper-level classes with more than twenty students, as follows:
The median grade in a class shall be 3.3, with the following distribution:
4.2-4.3
3.9-4.1
3.6-3.8
3.3-3.5
3.0-3.2
2.7-2.9
2.4-2.6
2.3 and under
0 percent to 5 percent, with a norm of 2.5 percent
10 percent to 20 percent, with a norm of 15 percent
74
The new grading system was phased in with new students and the students who had started law
school under the old grading system continued to be graded under that old system. Instructors
who taught upper level classes with 20 or fewer students were exhorted to try to minimize
departures from this curve, but these smaller classes were not strictly subject to the curve.
In April 2006, the Faculty acted again and revised the grade distribution policy effective Fall
semester 2006. The faculty added the following exceptions to the mandatory curve set forth
above:
When awarding grades at the extremes of the scale (i.e., “A+” grades or “D/F” grades),
faculty members must exercise their own judgment concerning what performances are
outstanding (A+) or seriously deficient (D,F). To the extent a faculty member‟s grades at
the extremes are below the distributional norms, the distribution of grades at adjacent grade
levels can be adjusted to achieve the overall distributional norms of 25% of grades at the
A+/A/A- level and 25% of grades at “B-” or below.
For upper-level courses with fewer than 30 students in which the final grade is based
primarily on a final examination, an alternative curve is mandatory. The median grade in
such courses shall be between 3.2 and 3.4, with the following distribution:
3.6-4.3
3.3-3.5
3.0-3.2
2.9 and below
A+/A/AB+
B
B-/C+/C/D/F
15-35%
20-30%
20-30%
15-35%
The curve is not applicable in upper-level seminars and other upper-level classes in which a
student‟s grade is based primarily on the student‟s performance on graded skills-oriented
tasks (including writing) other than a final examination. There shall be no deviations from
this policy without showing good cause to the Dean of the College of Law.
As a general rule, grading at the Law School is blind. Students identify their answers by an
exam number, not by their name, and the instructor does not learn their identity until grades have
been turned in. This system of anonymity does not work for seminar papers, but in the LAWR
program for first-year students, there is an effort to use a blind system of grading.
Pass/fail grading is used primarily for student-run activities (“co-curriculars”) in which credit
may be earned. Even tutorials and independent research projects must be graded. Pass/fail
grading is, however, allowed in the case of: (a) students who are taking Introduction to Law and
Legal Reasoning; and (b) students who are retaking a previously-failed course in order to get
credit for the course.
The Standards for Good Standing are set out in the Student Handbook. See Appendix 2-3 at 87.
They provide in brief that students must maintain a cumulative average of a 2.1, must complete
all of the requirements for a J.D. degree within eighty-four months (seven calendar years) from
the date of matriculation, and must “make reasonable progress” toward completion of the degree
75
at all times. Students who fail to maintain the minimum cumulative grade point or who fail to
make reasonable progress toward the degree have to petition in order to be reinstated in school.
N. Studies in Foreign Countries
As mentioned previously, the International and Comparative Law Program encourages faculty
and student research and study in academic settings abroad. In addition to the opportunity to
transfer up to six credit hours from accredited summer abroad programs offered by other U.S.
law schools, there are three principal programs open to students at the College:
1. Summer Study in Arcachon, France
The Law School offers up to six credit hours (three two-credit courses) for five weeks of
intensive coursework in a summer program held in Arcachon, France. Courses are currently
taught by professors from the Law School and by a French avocat who is also an adjunct
professor at the University of Paris, Michaël Amado. In the summer of 2006, thirty-three
students from Iowa and two students from other law schools throughout the United States
participated in the Arcachon program. For the past seven years, the program has been directed
by Professor Adrien Wing. This program was most recently accredited by the ABA in 2000 and
is due to be inspected again in the summer of 2007.
2. London Law Consortium
The Law School is the lead school in a consortium of seven U.S. law schools that sponsor a
program of study every spring semester in London for American law students. The program
offers U.S., comparative (with emphasis on British and European law), and international law
courses taught by faculty drawn from the seven U.S. law schools.29 In addition to classroom
studies, students can enroll in a clinical law program and work with British barristers and
solicitors. The London consortium was substantially reorganized in 1993 when the Program
moved to a new site in London and moved from the fall semester to the spring. Since that date,
the Law School has functioned as the administrator for the Consortium, and Iowa Professor Pat
Acton has acted as the on-site director. Like the Arcachon program, the London program makes
foreign study especially attractive for Iowa students because the credits they earn in this program
are not transfer credits. The London program allows the students to earn up to a full semester of
credits. The London program was last inspected and approved by the ABA in the spring of
2006.
3. The Bucerius Exchange Program
The College participates in a student exchange program with Bucerius Law School in Hamburg,
Germany. Bucerius Law School is the first private university for law in Germany, providing a
29
The other law schools are Chicago-Kent, University of Georgia, Indiana University at Bloomington,
University of Kansas, University of Missouri-Columbia, and University of Utah.
76
legal education focused on international business. It opened its doors in 2000 to start the first
class in its four-year program of legal instruction. Bucerius was founded with the generous
support of the Ebelin and Gerd Bucerius Zeit Foundation. (Gerd Bucerius was the long-time
publisher of die Zeit.) Bucerius has set high admissions and academic standards in order to be a
leading German law school. All students are required to have a TOEFL score equal to or greater
than 600 (paper exam).
Every fall, Bucerius sends all of its third-year students to study abroad in one of its many
exchange partner schools for the fall semester and welcomes in their place students from those
partner schools (many leading law schools in the United States, England, and elsewhere that
have signed exchange agreements with it). Prior to 2006, Iowa had sent a total of five Iowa
students to Bucerius. This fall, another Iowa student is studying at Bucerius under the exchange
program, and the first Bucerius student has come to Iowa under the agreement. Because of the
inequality of the exchange so far, it is possible that Bucerius may choose at some point to
terminate the agreement, but they have been very pleased with the Iowa students we have sent
and so far they have been willing to extend the agreement to give Bucerius a chance to restore
the balance in the exchange.
Professor John Reitz monitors the Bucerius exchange program for the College. In the summer of
2006, he visited Bucerius and met with President Karsten Schmidt and with Professor Hermann
Puender, who earned his LL.M. at Iowa in 1993. The Bucerius exchange program was
established by a consortium of American law schools under the leadership of Professor David S.
Clark at Willamette Law School. The consortium=s exchange program was last accredited by the
ABA following an inspection in 2002. Professor David Clark files an annual report on the
program.
Overall, the three programs described above have provided important opportunities for Iowa
students to study and travel abroad. The Strategic Plan calls for maintaining and strengthening
these programs. It also calls for considering new arrangements that would give our students
additional opportunities for foreign study.
O. Degrees in Addition to the J.D.: The LL.M. Degree in International and
Comparative Law
1. Brief Description of Program
In addition to the J.D. degree, the University of Iowa offers a Masters Degree (LL.M.) in
international and comparative law. In 1991, this degree replaced the Master of Comparative Law
(M.C.L. degree) and the four-year Juris Doctor (J.D.) Degree Certificate program previously
offered by the College. The College recognized the value and importance of this program in its
Strategic Plan for 2006-2010 by committing itself in Goal 2, Theme 4, to “continue to maintain a
high-quality LL.M. program with a modest increase in the number of LL.M. students.”
The program is specifically designed for: (1) graduates of J.D. programs here in the United
States who wish to deepen their understanding of international and comparative law, including
77
the law pertaining to international business transactions; and (2) foreign-trained jurists who wish
to receive either advanced training in the same areas or a more general orientation to and specific
training in United States law and legal institutions. The Iowa program is deliberately kept small
(seven-fifteen students per year) so that each student can receive substantial attention from the
faculty.30 The program was inspected and approved by the ABA as part of its last inspection of
the Law School in 1999-2000.
Foreign applicants must have completed the basic course of university studies that qualifies the
candidate to sit for the bar examination (e.g., the French maîtrise, the German “first state bar
examination”). Applicants who do not hold a degree from an English language university in
Australia, Canada (except for Quebec), New Zealand, the United Kingdom, or the United States
must also have achieved a score of at least 580 on the paper examination/237 on the computer/92
on the Internet version of the TOEFL examination.31 The University also has a rule that
applicants who do not have TOEFL scores over 600 on the paper/250 on the computer/100 on
the Internet versions of the examination must be tested at matriculation by the University=s
English as a Second Language department and may be required to take further English courses if
deemed necessary. All applicants must present evidence (university transcripts and letters of
recommendation) that they are serious students with a solid record of academic and/or
professional achievement.
Except in extraordinary circumstances, students are permitted to start their studies only in the fall
semester. The program can be completed in two full semesters (August to May), but students are
normally permitted to take at least one additional semester, especially to complete the required
LL.M. paper. Because the College offers courses during the summer, most LL.M. students
complete their degree within a calendar year (August to August), and since the University has
increased the fees for completing incompletes in the summer, most students have completed the
degree requirements in the two regular semesters for fall and spring.
To earn the LL.M. degree, each student must successfully complete a course of at least 24 hours
of academic credit, as approved by their academic advisor. For foreign-educated lawyers, three
of those credits must be earned as follows: (1) one pass/fail credit in the fall semester for a
course on U.S. methods of legal reasoning based primarily on cases (waived for common law
trained students); (2) one pass/fail credit in the fall semester for a tutorial course designed to give
foreign-trained jurists an overview of the U.S. legal system and legal institutions; and (3) at least
one graded credit for a research paper on some aspect of United States law, comparative law, or
public international law. U.S. J.D.-holders and those foreigners who have been trained in
another common law jurisdiction and whose English competence is sufficiently high are required
to undertake a more ambitious, four-credit research project intended to lead to the production of
30
For numbers of students in recent years, please see Table 2-13 at the end of this section.
31
As an experiment, the University is also accepting IELTS scores starting with the admissions for 2007,
and the College of Law will accept scores of 7.0 or greater, as long as there is no subscore lower than 6.0.
Students submitting IELTS scores will have to pass an English Competency exam administered by the English
and a Second Language Department prior to registration.
78
a publishable paper. Others suitably qualified may also attempt the longer research paper. To
assist the students with their research and writing, they are organized into a non-credit writing
seminar that runs throughout the fall and spring semesters.
With the exception of the special LL.M. tutorial and the writing seminar, courses are taken
together with regular J.D. students from the Law School‟s rich offerings on U.S., international,
and comparative law. This method of instruction ensures a very effective comparative
experience for the foreigners through broad contact with U.S. law students and professors, and
the U.S.-trained students benefit from close contact with the foreign-trained lawyers in their
courses. Foreign LL.M. students are especially encouraged, but not required, to take at least one
first-year J.D. course.32
LL.M. candidates have the privileges of all other students for the use of the Law School=s library
collection, which includes, in addition to the extensive collection U.S. legal materials, about
165,000 volumes of international and comparative law materials and extensive microform
collections and electronic data bases containing international and comparative legal materials.
Each LL.M. student may also request a student library carrel. The LL.M. students are given the
same priority as J.D. students in their last year, so normally they are able to get individual
carrels, but occasionally they have to share with one other student, and students offering to share
are given priority. LL.M. students are also invited to make use of the College=s Writing Center
on the same basis as other students (i.e., with the permission of their instructors to the extent the
use of the Center is in connection with a class assignment). In particular, the LL.M. students are
encouraged to use the services of the Writing Center in writing their LL.M. research paper, and
about half of them generally do so. Finally, LL.M.s seeking employment after their degree are
encouraged to use the services of the Career Placement Office, and many do so.
An important aspect of the LL.M. program is the rich diversity that it brings to the Law School=s
academic community. Starting with the 1999-2000 academic year, candidates for the LL.M.
degree have come not only from the United States, but also from the following foreign countries:
Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, The Republic of China (Taiwan), the People=s Republic
of China, Dominican Republic, Eritrea, France, Germany, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland,
Italy, Japan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Mexico, New Zealand, South Korea, Syria, Thailand, Ukraine,
Vietnam, and Zimbabwe.33
32
For the distribution of LL.M. students in J.D. classes in the past academic year, 2005-06, see Table 2-14
at the end of this section.
33
The countries that have contributed the largest number of LL.M. students during this period are China
(PRC) (23 students), Korea (10 students), and Germany (13 students). During this time period (through the end of
2005-06 academic year), there have also been eleven J.D.s in the LL.M. program. Of those who have failed to
complete the program and earn the LL.M. degree, all have been J.D.s (five in all in this time period), for whom it
is never quite as clear that the LL.M. degree is necessary to secure employment in the U.S. Finally, one foreign
student=s LL.M. has been revoked after that person voluntarily disclosed the fraudulent forging of transcripts and
reference letters.
79
As a major part of his duties as the Associate Dean for International Programs, Professor John
Reitz directs the LL.M. program and serves as the academic advisor to the LL.M. students. He
receives one-quarter release time for the Associate Dean position, and the greater share of his
efforts in this regard concern administration of the LL.M. program, probably about two thirds, or
in other words, about one sixth of this faculty line. His main responsibilities for the
administration of the LL.M. program include: chairing the admissions committee for the LL.M.
program and, in that capacity, reviewing and commenting on every admissions file before review
by the rest of the admissions committee; responding to non-routine inquiries about the program;
awarding research positions and scholarships to admitted students; serving as academic adviser
to the LL.M.s; overseeing publicity, including updating of the ICLP web site; preparation of
program brochures; and applying to and assuring that Iowa remains qualified as a host school for
programs like the Muskie Fellowship program for students from certain countries of the former
Soviet Union.
In addition, one faculty member, usually Professor Reitz, receives one course credit (three
semester hours or one quarter of the normal teaching load through 2006-07) for teaching a
combination of the LL.M. Tutorial and the LL.M. Seminar and grading and commenting on the
LL.M. papers.34
2. Concerns, Comments, and Issues
a. Meeting Program Goals
The Law School‟s goals for the LL.M. program are two-fold:
a.
to provide the pedagogically best program of graduate-level and post-J.D.
education in international and comparative law to a strong group of lawyers who
have completed their first degree in law in various countries around the world,
and
b.
to attract strong graduate students from around the globe, including the
developing world, as part of the internationalization of the curriculum to enrich
the educational opportunities for all students and faculty.
In general, the College believes that the LL.M. program fulfills those two goals. There is no
doubt that the LL.M. students graduate from the Iowa program with first-hand knowledge of the
U.S. system because they take most of their classes with J.D. students from the U.S. Because the
program is kept fairly small, it does not drain resources away from the J.D. program. At most,
the LL.M. program claims between one-third and one-half of a faculty position for teaching and
administrative functions exclusively dedicated to LL.M. students.
34
When Professor Reitz is on developmental leave or when, as in the Spring of 2007, he will be teaching
in the London Program, other professors take over the LL.M. seminar and grade the LL.M. papers.
80
The presence, moreover, of foreign-trained LL.M. students in the J.D. classes has been
recognized by the faculty as providing a resource that enriches the classes for both J.D. and
LL.M. students alike. Former colleague and frequent visiting professor Sir Geoffrey Palmer
captures this idea when he speaks of the pleasure he finds in teaching courses on international
and comparative law subjects at Iowa to classes that are Amini-U.N.s.@ There are a few small,
specialty courses in the international and comparative area whose enrollment consists very
substantially of LL.M. students. Without LL.M. student participation, these courses, which are
also open to J.D. students, might not be able to be offered or offered as often as they are. Thus
LL.M. participation contributes to expanding the educational opportunities for the J.D. students,
as well as enriching those experiences through cultural diversity.
b. Writing Instruction for LL.M.s
Now that the faculty has restructured the first-year J.D. research and writing course, it should
consider a modest increase in the teaching resources devoted to the LL.M. program. Goal 2,
Theme 4, Point 4 of the Strategic Plan calls for addressing the question whether to open up these
LAWR courses to LL.M. students or create a separate LAWR course for LL.M.s. Currently, the
LL.M.s receive brief instruction in U.S. legal research methods in the non-credit LL.M. seminar,
and they also write at least a seminar-style research paper, but they are not being given the same
in-depth research and writing experience that J.D. students are given. At least some of the
LL.M. students would undoubtedly want such instruction, especially those who are planning to
seek practical training with U.S. law firms and other legal employers after completing their
degree. However, at least some of the LL.M.s probably would not want to be required to
participate in an LAWR course on the same basis as J.D. students because of their somewhat
lower capacity to express themselves fluently in English.
c. Adequacy of Other Resources
Curriculum, space, and library resources are fully adequate to accommodate the small number of
LL.M. students without depriving J.D. students of resources in any significant way. Undoubtedly
the greatest resource needs for the LL.M. degree, however, concern additional scholarship
support, advertising, and administration, discussed in the following subsections.
d. Financial Aid
The Law School currently provides up to ten research assistant positions for LL.M. students, the
principal benefit of which is to reduce tuition charges to in-state levels (less than half out-of-state
levels). Under current admissions conditions, it appears necessary to offer such positions to
virtually every applicant we wish to enroll, and if we wish to have more than ten LL.M. students
per year, we will probably have to offer more research positions. Even those benefits are not
enough to enable all of the students that Iowa accepts to enroll in our program. Financial aid that
leaves the foreign student obligated to pay $13,374 resident tuition for 2006-07 is not sufficient
to attract many top students. The College thus needs more and bigger scholarships for the LL.M.
program.
81
The Law School currently has only two endowed scholarships for LL.M. tuition and neither of
them is adequate to cover all of in-state tuition. For academic year 2006-07, one provided $7500
and the other only $3500. We have enjoyed several non-endowed partial tuition scholarships in
the past for several years at a time, but none of them proved lasting. This year we have just
received a new non-endowed partial tuition scholarship which could go either to a J.D. or LL.M.
candidate. The other scholarships available to LL.M. students are externally funded
scholarships, chiefly from Fulbright and the Muskie Fellowship programs. We have done very
well in attracting such scholarship recipients. In recent years, Iowa has tended to have at least
two LL.M. students supported by such external scholarships, and in 2005-06, we had four. See
Table 2-13. But to continue to attract the very best students, we need more scholarships.
Increasingly, the best qualified students are turning down our offers of admission, even though
they are impressed with our program and would like to attend, because they have offers of
substantial scholarship aid from other schools or because they simply cannot afford to pay our
tuition.
e. Declining Applications and Enrollments and the Issue of Advertising
It is clearly cause for concern that Iowa=s applicant pool for the LL.M. program has declined
sharply since 2002. Because the program at Iowa is quite small, the Law School has been able
to continue to enroll LL.M. classes of good quality, despite the drop in applications, but further
drops could jeopardize the College=s ability to maintain the size of the LL.M. class without
sacrificing the quality of those it admits. In fact, Goal 2, Theme 4 of the Strategic Plan calls for
“a modest increase in the number of LL.M. students.” The College recognizes that this goal is
achievable only if another goal set out in the strategic plan is also achieved, namely, the goal of
increasing the financial aid that can be made available to LL.M. students.35 Nevertheless, even
without increased financial aid resources, the College certainly does not want to see a further
drop in the number of students enrolling.
One measure the Strategic Plan recommends is to undertake some targeted advertising.36 Up to
now, Iowa has had no advertising budget for advertisements in media aimed at foreign or
domestic law grads. Since 2000, we have designed and printed two small brochures about the
LL.M. program and also about the international and comparative programs. The Law School
made one mass-mailing abroad and domestically, as well as more targeted mailings annually. In
spring of 2005, Professor Reitz represented the College at a fair for prospective LL.M. students
in Muenster, Germany. In view, however, of the declining number of LL.M. applicants since the
Second Gulf War, it would appear prudent to experiment with some well targeted forms of
advertising to foreign applicants to see if the College can increase the quality of the class. The
35
Goal 2, Theme 4, Point 1, calls for “aggressive efforts to recruit top foreign-trained law students for the
LL.M. program . . . both by increasing measures to publicize our program . . . and by increasing the number and size
of scholarships . . . .”
36
Goal 2, Theme 4, Point 2.
82
Strategic Plan also notes that developing formal linkages with selected top foreign law faculties
may also prove to be a good mechanism for encouraging top foreign students to come to Iowa.37
f. Administrator for ICLP and Office for LL.M.s and Other Parts of ICLP
Unlike many other law schools with LL.M. programs, Iowa has run its LL.M. program (and the
other parts of ICLP) without any non-faculty administrator. As a result, program administration
has absorbed a rather large amount of the time of the Associate Dean for International and
Comparative Law Programs. For example, the admissions process for the LL.M. program is
handled largely by the Associate Dean and two faculty colleagues. The Admissions Office
assembles the files for evaluation by the faculty, much in the same way as the J.D. admissions
are handled. But once LL.M. students are admitted, the Associate Dean and his secretary, Grace
Tully, handle all the correspondence concerning research positions and scholarships. Keeping
track during the spring of which students have accepted and which have received the documents
necessary to apply for the visa, is quite time-consuming.
The Associate Dean=s effort have usually been supplemented by one research assistant per year
who has arranged and led field trips for LL.M.s, exchange students, and foreign research scholars
(to the Iowa Supreme Court and the federal District Court in Cedar Rapids, as well as to the
Oakdale minimum security prison and other local sites of interest); provided the necessary
transportation with university vans; and worked with the Associate Dean to keep program
display cases on the fourth floor current. In addition, the Associate=s secretary, Grace Tully, has
handled much of the correspondence for both the LL.M.s and the research scholars, as well as
assisting the Associate Dean in preparing and filing various applications by the College to
qualify as a host school for various government programs that provide funding for foreign LL.M.
students and research scholars. She also fields questions from students and visiting scholars and
welcomes them in the Associate Dean=s absence and maintains the ICLP bulletin board and
display cases on the fourth floor. These duties have not left the Associate Dean and his assistants
much time to look aggressively for more sources of funding for LL.M. students or to expand the
program of contacts for the foreign students and visitors with the local courts and bar. It would
seem more efficient to use a part-time non-faculty administrator to accomplish as many of the
administrative aspects of these tasks as possible, so that faculty time can be devoted to broader
issues of program development and funding.
It would also seem desirable to create an office space that LL.M. students and foreign research
scholars might be able to identify as specifically related to them. Right now there is no such
space, although they tend to congregate near Grace Tully=s office on the rare occasions when
they all need information at once. The LL.M. display case is in the corridor on the fourth floor
outside the faculty lounge and does not provide a place to congregate. The ICLP bulletin board is
likewise in a corridor on the fourth floor. If there were an administrative director for ICLP
programs generally and for the LL.M program specifically, that person=s office could become
such a physical locus for the program. In addition to housing the administrator, it could contain
some basic reference material on the Iowa City community and other information that might be
37
Goal 2, Theme 4, Point 3.
83
of particular relevance to the LL.M.s or to other groups within ICLP, including the foreign
research scholars, students in the International Law Society, and student writers for TLCP.
TABLE 2-13: THE LL.M. PROGRAM SINCE THE LAST SELF STUDY 1998-2005
Academic Year
Starting in:
1998
LL.M.
students
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
10
11
16
20
12
8
10
8
13
12
22
13
8
7
LL.M.s with
Tuition
Scholarships
(Fulbrights/
Muskies)
7
5
6
4
6
(2)
(2)
(2)
(1)
(4)
LL.M.s with
RAs
9
8
8
8
7
89
132
108
65
52
Graduates
from LL.M.
Program
LL.M.
Applicants
9
1999
5
82
97
84
TABLE 2-14: DISTRIBUTION OF LL.M. STUDENTS IN J.D. CLASSES 2005-06
Number of LL.M. Students Enrolled
Course Title
Fall 2005
Antitrust
1
Capital Punishment Seminar
1
Civil Procedure
1
Comparative Const Law
2
Comparative Law
4
Constitutional Law
1
Constitutional Law II
2
Contract & Sales Tran I
3
Contract & Sales II
1
3
1
Copyrights
Corporations I
1
1
Clinic Law Pr-Intern
Contemporary Russian Law
Spring 2006
3
1
1
Criminal Pro Investigation
1
Critical Race Theory
1
Cultural Property
1
Employment Discrimination
2
Employment Law
2
European Union Law
1
Federal Antitrust Policy
1
Foreign Com Int‟l Legal Res
1
Human Rights World Comm
2
85
Immigration
2
Independent Research Proj
1
Int=l Bus Trans
2
Int=l Criminal Law
1
3
Int=l Comm Arbitration
Int=l Environment Law
2
2
Pub Int‟l Law
3
Intro Intellectual Prop Law
1
Intro Law & Legal Reasoning
7
Jurisprudence
3
Law & Economics
1
Law Electronic Media
1
Law in Muslim World
1
1
LL.M. Seminar
10
8
LL.M. Tutorial
8
Managing National Security
1
Nonprofit Organization II
1
Problems of Int=l Law
1
Property I
1
Property II
Supplemental Writing
1
1
Supreme Court in Wartime
Torts
1
2
86
Attachment 2-1 LIST OF SUMMER COURSES 2001-05
Summer 2001
First Session
Summer Entrants
91:102 Intro to Law & Legal Reasoning
91:120 Contracts & Sales I
91:265 Evidence
91:308 Professional Responsibility
91:229 International Intellectual Property Law
91:209 Advanced Torts
91:232 Constitutl Law II
Second Session
Summer Entrants
91:132 Property I
91:121 Contracts & Sales II
Upper Class (Monday, June 25 - Friday, August 3)
91:354 State & Local Government
91:272 Basic Federal Income Tax
91:235 Constitutl Law of the European Union
91:251 Employee Benefits (starts July 2)
Instructor
Credits
No.
Bauer
Estin (Leibig)
1
4
34
34
Wing, David
Stensvaag
Rapaport
Frankel
McLay
Goodpaster
6
3
3
3
3
3
44
42
26
7
2
29
deLaTorre
Leibig
3
3
35
35
Matsumoto
Ward
Domrin
Howell
3
4
3
3
29
31
13
6
Bauer
Liebig
Bohannan
1
4
3
36
37
36
Wing, Blanck
Hovenkamp
Somek
Ward
Costi
Goodpaster
6
3
3
3
3
3
39
14
7
52
6
46
deLaTorre
3
37
Matsumoto
Howell
Ramirez
Koutrakos
Domrin
3
3
3
3
3
43
3
13
1
18
Summer 2002
First Session
Summer Entrants
91:120 Contracts & Sales I
91:364 Torts
Upper Class
91:231 Antitrust Policy
91:356 Social Justice
91:241 Corporations I
91:218 Int‟l Environmental Law (Water)
91:232 Constitutional Law II
Second Session
Summer Entrants
91:132 Property I
Upper Class (Monday, July 1 - Friday, August 9)
91:251 Employee Benefits
91:290 Juvenile Justice
91:266 The Law of the European Union
91:195 Intro to International Law
87
Summer 2003
First Session
Summer Entrants
91:364 Torts
Upper Class
91:202 Advanced Civil Procedure
91:327 Payment Systems
91:232 Constitutional Law II
Second Session
Summer Entrants
91:132 Property I
91:120 Contracts I
Upper Class
91:258 Arts & Entertainment Law
91:265 Evidence
91:225 Cmprtve Lw in Post-Communist Countries
Bauer
Love
1
5
31
32
Wing, Estin
Horwitz
Ward
Carlson
Goodpaster
6
3
4
3
3
45
9
24
8
53
deLaTorre
Carrasco
3
3
32
32
Hovenkamp
Acton
Stensvaag
Baker
Domrin
3
2
3
3
3
17
11
63
19
8
Raymond
Carlson
1
5
30
31
Wing, Andersen
Price
Ward
Geiringer
Ramirez
3
4
3
3
43
3
45
11
19
deLaTorre
Carrasco
3
3
30
30
Hovenkamp
Baker
Domrin
Erwin
3
3
3
2
27
13
11
7
Summer 2004
First Session
91:124 Criminal Law
91:247 Comparative Media Law
91:193 Human Rights in the World Community
91:290 Juv Delinquency & Juvenile Justice System
Second Session
91:132 Property I
91:120 Contracts I
Upper Class
91:225 Cmpttve Lw in Post-Communist Countries
91:299 Genetics
88
Summer 2005
First Session
Summer Entrants
91:120 Contract & Sales I
Upper Class
91:198 Advanced Legal Research
91:251 Employee Benefits 5/17–6/9
91:125 Criminal Procedure: Investigation
91:303 Federal Indian Law
Second Session
Summer Entrants
91:132 Property I
91:364 Torts
Upper Class
91:290 Juv Delinquency & Juvenile Justice System
91:225 Cmprtv Lw in Post-Communist Countries
89
Raymond
Liebig
1
5
30
30
Wing, Somek
Library Staff
Howell
Gardner
Berger
6
2
3
3
3
44
10
7
37
13
P. deLaTorre
Hovenkamp
3
3
30
30
Bandstra/Gardner
Hughes
Domrin
3
2
3
21
29
23
CHAPTER THREE: FACULTY
A. Introduction
The Faculty of the Law School consists of fifty-five persons. Of these, forty-five are either
tenured or tenure track, seven are clinical faculty who have attained Clinical Faculty Career
Status, and three are LAWR instructors. In addition, there are three emeritus faculty members
and eight members of the faculties of other University of Iowa departments who have zero-time
appointments in the Law School.38
There are six deans39 who divide their time between teaching, scholarship, and administrative
duties. During 2006 calendar year, there were thirty adjunct faculty and one visiting professor.
During the fall semester of the 1999-2000 academic year there were two visitors and eleven
adjuncts teaching in the Law School. At the start of the Fall, 2006 semester, one new member
joined the faculty on the tenure track, plus three LAWR instructors.
The Iowa faculty are a highly accomplished group. See full resumes in Appendix 3-1. They
attended an array of colleges and universities for their Bachelors‟ degrees, most graduating with
various levels of honors, including Phi Beta Kappa. The institutions include: Augsburg, Baker,
Barnard, Boston University, Brigham Young, Brooklyn College, California Institute of
Technology, Calvin, Carleton, Chicago, Dartmouth, Florida, Grinnell, Harvard, Indiana, Iowa,
Kansas, McGill, Michigan, Minnesota, Northeastern, Northwestern, Princeton, Purdue,
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Rice, Seattle Pacific, St. Olaf, Stanford, Syracuse, U.C.
Berkeley, U.C.L.A., U.S.C., Vassar, Washington, Wesleyan, Wisconsin, and Yale.
The faculty attended a broad group of law schools as well, with many receiving honors or Order
of the Coif distinctions. Several graduated number one in their class (Columbia, Florida, North
Carolina, Wisconsin). Most served as editors of law journals, including as editors-in-chief. Many
were active in various co-curricular activities. The schools include: Boston University, Brigham
Young, Chicago, Columbia, Florida, Georgetown, Georgia, Harvard, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,
Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, North Carolina, Northwestern, Pennsylvania,
Stanford, Syracuse, Texas, U.C. Berkeley, U.C.L.A., U.S.C., Washington, Wayne State,
Wisconsin, Vienna (Austria), and Yale.
38
Faculty members with zero-time appointments are: Professors Anderson (Public Health), Buckwalter
(Nursing), Dungy (Medicine), Dyer (Journalism), Hanley (History), Hauserman (Economics), Kerber (History) and
Solow (Economics).
39
Dean Carolyn Jones, Associate Dean for Research Arthur Bonfield, Associate Dean for Academic
Affairs Eric Andersen (Jonathan Carlson will succeed Eric Anderson in 2007), Associate Dean for Faculty
Development Adrien Wing, Associate Dean of Student Affairs Linda McGuire, Associate Dean for the
International and Comparative Law Program John Reitz. Dean Jones is a full-time administrator, but has taught in
the past at the Law School. Dean McGuire is not a member of the tenure track/tenured faculty, but she does teach.
90
After graduation, many faculty were selected for prestigious clerkships. Colleagues clerked for
Supreme Court Justices Lewis Powell, Harry Blackmun, and Thurgood Marshall. Many did
federal clerkships on almost every circuit as well as numerous district courts. One member
clerked on the Iowa Supreme Court.
Professors have been admitted to the Bars of the following jurisdictions: Alabama, California,
Connecticut, District of Columbia, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan,
Minnesota, Montana, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Texas, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.
Colleagues held a variety of legal and nonlegal jobs before joining the legal academy. Most
practiced law for several years. Many worked in large big city firms as associates, and one was a
partner in a major Washington DC law firm. One professor was Attorney-Advisor at the U.S.
State Department. One was a newspaper reporter and a veteran of a U.S. submarine service.
Another was director of operations and chief of staff (acting) to Lt. Gov. Evelyn F. Murphy in
Massachusetts. One professor was Program Officer with the Ford Foundation in Beijing,
Bangkok, Hanoi and New Delhi. A colleague was a public school teacher as well as a planner for
the Wisconsin Planning Office. One professor was Chief Counsel, Subcommittee to Investigate
Juvenile Delinquency, Judicial Committee, U.S. Senate.
Colleagues hold both advanced law degrees, including LL.M.s from Michigan and Yale, and a
S.J.D. from Michigan as well. Four hold Ph.D.s from Harvard, Princeton, Texas, and Yale.
Masters degrees have been earned at Boston University, Chicago, Iowa, Michigan, Pittsburgh,
Princeton, Texas, Tufts, U.C. Berkeley, U.C.L.A., and Yale.
Faculty have been invited as semester or academic year visitors at the following law schools:
Cornell, Duke, Florida, Ohio State, Oregon, Durham (England), Exeter (England), Harvard,
Kansas, McGeorge, Miami, N.Y. Law School, N.Y.U, Tulane, U.C.L.A., U.C. Berkeley,
Chicago, University of Michigan, University of North Carolina, University of Puerto Rico,
University of San Francisco, Pennsylvania, U.S.C., University of Washington, Wisconsin,
Washington University, Vanderbilt, Vienna, Virginia, Vermont, and Yale.
Iowa professors have been sought out as Deans of other law schools. Alums of the faculty
currently serve as Deans of N.Y. Law School and the University of Washington Law School.
One former faculty member became Dean at Washington University-St Louis, and another at
Ohio State. The latter is currently President of City College in New York. Two members of the
current faculty became Deans at Florida State and Washington & Lee, but subsequently returned
to Iowa.
A number of faculty joined Iowa from other law schools. They had previously taught as full-time
professors at: Chicago-Kent, Colorado, Connecticut, Hastings, Texas, Tulane, U.C.-Davis,
Vanderbilt, and Vienna.
Colleagues are very international in orientation, and have studied various foreign languages
including: Chinese, Dutch, French, German, Italian, Latin, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish,
91
Swahili, and Vietnamese. One colleague from Austria is a native German speaker and several
others have attained near native fluency in their respective languages.
Professors have been selected for numerous distinguished lectureships around the world
including: the Institute d‟Etudes Politiques de Paris; and the University of London School of
Oriental and African Studies. Several have been Fulbright Scholars, most recently this fall in
Portugal.
The Iowa faculty have received numerous awards and honors. These items include Universitywide ones such as the: James N. Murray Award for an untenured faculty member; Michael
Brody Award for Faculty Excellence in Service to the University of Iowa; Regents Award for
Faculty Excellence; Hancher-Finkbine Outstanding University of Iowa Faculty Award;
President and Provost Award for Teaching Excellence; President‟s Award for State Outreach and
Public Engagement; Jean Jew Women‟s Rights Award; Distinguished Achievement Award from
the Iowa Celebration of Excellence Among Women; and the African Student Association
Diversity Award.
Statewide, colleagues have received much recognition, including: the Gertrude Rush Award
from the Iowa Women‟s Bar Association and the Iowa National Bar Association; Award and
Special Recognition from the Governor‟s Office; Iowa State Bar Association President‟s Award
for Outstanding Meritorious Service to the Bar and Public; Commissioners Award from the Iowa
Commission on Persons with Disabilities; Distinguished Agency Award from Citizens for
People with Disabilities; Iowa Civil Liberties Union Outstanding Service to Civil Liberties
Award; Iowa City Human Rights Commission Isabel Turner Award for Outstanding
Contributions to Human Rights; Iowa City Human Rights Commission Lifetime Achievement
Award; Johnson County Cultural Alliance Larry Eckholt Award; Association of Fund Raising
Professionals Eastern Iowa Chapter Benjamin Franklin Award; Iowa Humanities Award for
Lifetime Service to Public Humanities; and Friends of Iowa Civil Rights Award for Outstanding
Contributions by an Individual. One colleague was presented with an honorary D.H.L degree
from Cornell College for “remarkable success in administrative law reform.”
Nationally, a number of colleagues have been honored, including the: American Academy of
Arts and Sciences; Society of Professional Journalists (Sigma Delta Chi) National Research
Award; Derrick Bell Award from the AALS Minority Section; Haywood Burns-Shanara Gilbert
Award from the Northeast Law Professors of Color; and Public Service Award, National
Association of Maternal and Child Health and Crippled Children Services Programs. Another
colleague was honored by the Hispanic Bar Association of the District of Columbia. One
colleague won an outstanding dissertation award from the Yale history department this year.
Several have been honored by their high school and college alma maters with distinguished
alumni awards.
Faculty have been featured in all of the various Who‟s Who publications including: Who‟s Who
in the World; The World Who‟s Who of Women; Who‟s Who in America; Who‟s Who of
American Women; Who‟s Who Among African Americans; Who‟s Who in American Law;
92
Who‟s Who in Finance and Industry; Who‟s Who in American Education; Who‟s Who in the
Midwest; and Who‟s Who in the East.
Over the 2000-2006 period, the Law School has maintained its commitment to hiring an
excellent diverse faculty and interviewed a wide array of individuals. For example, during the
2006-2007 hiring season, we interviewed twenty-seven entry level candidates, including twentyfour in Washington D.C. at the AALS Recruitment Fair. Of the twenty-four, twenty-one were
tenure track faculty and three were applying for LAWR slots. Twelve were men and twelve were
women. Six were minorities, including four minority males. Three additional candidates
cancelled from our interview roster, including two minority males. Three LAWR candidates
were interviewed at the Law School – two white women and one white man.
In terms of callbacks, nine of the twenty-four seen in Washington were invited to campus. This
group included four women and five men. A Chicano male and a Native American female were
in the pool of candidates for the tenure track.
In 2005-2006, twenty-five candidates interviewed at the AALS recruitment conference, and six
were members of racial minority groups. Of the two invited to interview on campus, none were
members of such groups. In addition, two lateral candidates were interviewed on campus, one of
which was a member of a racial minority group. The one lateral candidate hired to begin in the
2006-2007 academic year is a member of a racial minority group.
In 2004-2005, eighteen candidates interviewed at the AALS recruitment conference, and seven
were members of minority groups. Of the three candidates invited to interview on campus, one
was a member of such a group. The one person hired was a non-minority female.
Since 2000, thirteen new tenure track and tenured faculty have joined the Law School, including
Dean Jones. Of these thirteen, eight were entry level, and five were laterals. Seven were
females. One of the laterals was pre-tenure. Four minorities were hired in this group, including
two African American lateral females, one Asian-American entry male, and one Native
American lateral male. Unfortunately, three of these thirteen colleagues have left. One white
male entry colleague left to join the University of Pennsylvania faculty right after receiving
tenure at Iowa. The Native American colleague left to live near his tribe and joined the Syracuse
faculty. One white female left prior to her third year review. The Law School made offers to
nine additional tenure track people, who did not accept. These included three white females and
two Asian-American males. Those who declined our offers later accepted offers from schools
such as Harvard, Northwestern, and UCLA. One became a military appeals court judge. During
this same period, two laterals, including an African male, did look-see visits, and were given
tenured offers, but declined for family reasons. In 2006, the Law School also extended offers to
three LAWR instructors, two white females and one white male. All offers were accepted.
The median age of the faculty is fifty-three; the average age is fifty-two. Of the full-time
members of the faculty, including those in the administration, sixteen began their teaching
careers before 1980; fourteen began their careers between 1980 and 1990; and twenty-one began
their careers after 1990.
93
The Law School is committed to maintaining and promoting a nondiscriminatory environment
on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, disability, or sexual orientation with
respect to the recruitment, retention, and support of faculty. The Law School has long been and
continues to be committed to diversity and equality on the basis of race and gender in hiring,
compensation, promotion, retention, and the terms, conditions, responsibilities and privileges of
employment.
As in the past, the College has made focused efforts to increase the number of women and
minorities on the faculty. Achievement of these goals has not been easy. To put it simply, the
results of recruitment and retention efforts, while encouraging in some respects, have not met the
Law School‟s hopes and aspirations. Two assessments of the women and minority representation
on the Iowa faculty follow. The first compares the constituency of the faculty in 1999 (the time
of the last Self Study) to the constituency of the faculty in 2006. The second compares the Iowa
faculty to ten comparable law schools.
Of the entire fifty-two tenured/tenure track faculty (including clinical professors) in 2006,
nineteen (or 36.5%) are women and 33 (or 63.5%) are men. Of the entire faculty of fifty-five in
2006 (including three LAWR professors on one-year contracts), 21 (or 38%) are women and 34
(or 62%) are men. At the beginning of the 1999-2000 academic year, of the entire fifty
tenured/tenure track faculty (including clinical professors), fourteen (or 28%) were women and
thirty-six (or 72%) were men. Consequently, progress has been made in increasing the
percentage of women on the faculty. The faculty is not yet satisfied, however, that the increase
has been sufficient. The Law School herein reaffirms its commitment to make further progress in
this respect.
At the time of the last Self Study in 1999-2000, five (or 10%) of the entire faculty of fifty were
members of minority groups. In fall 2006, seven (or 13%) of the fifty-two tenured and tenuretrack faculty (including clinical professors) are members of minority groups. Thus, in the area of
minority recruitment and retention, the Law School has made some progress in the last seven
years. The faculty intends to concentrate on successful minority faculty recruitment and
retention. Considering the results of past efforts, the College may need to take creative steps to
attract minority faculty if it hopes to achieve its avowed and longstanding goal of increasing
minority faculty representation.
The first two tables below reflect the changes in the faculty‟s demographics with respect to
gender and race between 1999 and 2006. The last two tables capture the percentage of minority
representation on the faculties of Iowa and ten comparable schools during the 1998-99 and the
2005-06 academic years. The two latter tables show that of these eleven schools, Iowa ranked 7th
(tied with Texas) in Fall 2005 and 9th (tied with Texas) in Spring 2006; and roughly 7th (tied with
3 other law schools) in the average percentage of minorities for 2005-06. In 1998-99 Iowa
ranked alone in 6th place among the comparison group. Progress has been made very recently in
the 2005-06 hiring season, as discussed below, but much needs to be done if Iowa wishes to rank
in the top half of the comparison group and, more importantly, to achieve its own goals. The
Law School will have to continue to increase the pool of minority candidates, and it will have to
94
overcome the disadvantages of Iowa City‟s small minority population, the Law School‟s
increasingly non-competitive salaries, and the very high teaching load expected of new faculty.
TABLE 3-1 DISTRIBUTION AMONG RANK AND POSITIONS BY GENDER,
AND BY RACE AND ETHNICITY 1999
A
B
Tenured
n (%)
I. All Faculty
II.By Gender:
A. Men
B. Women
III. By Race &
Ethnicity:
A. Caucasian
B. OtherTotal
1. Afr. Amer.
2. Hispanic
3. Asian
Amer.
% of Each Category
C
D
Combined
Untenured
Tenured and
Untenured
n (%)
n (%)
E
F
Clinical
Faculty
Total
Faculty
n (%)
n (%)
41
2
43
7
50(100%)
32(78%)
9(22%)
1(50%)
1(50%)
33(77%)
10(23%)
3(43%)
4(57%)
36(72%)
14(28%)
36(88%)
2(100%)
38(88%)
7(100%)
45(90%)
5(12%)
----
5(12%)
----
5(10%)
3(07%)
1(02%)
-------
3(07%)
1(02%)
-------
3(06%)
1(02%)
1(02%)
-----
1(02%)
----
1(02%)
95
TABLE 3-2 DISTRIBUTION AMONG RANK AND POSITIONS BY GENDER, AND
BY RACE AND ETHNICITY SPRING 2006
A
I.
II.
All Faculty
B
% of Each Category
C
D
E
F
Clinical
Faculty
Total Faculty
n (%)
n (%)
Tenured
Untenured
n (%)
n (%)
Combined
Tenured and
Untenured
n (%)
39
6
45
7
52(100%)
28(72%)
11(28%)
2(33%)
4(67%)
30(66%)
15(34%)
3(43%)
4(57%)
33(63%)
19(37%)
34(87%)
5(13%)
5(83%)
1(17%)
39(87%)
6(13%)
7(100%)
----
46(88%)
6(12%)
3(08%)
1(02.5%)
1(02.5%)
------1(17%)
3(07%)
1(02%)
2(05%)
----------
3(06%)
1(02%)
2(04%)
By Gender:
A. Men
B. Women
III. By Race &
Ethnicity:
A. Caucasian
B. OtherTotal
1. Afr. Amer.
2. Hispanic
3. Asian
Amer.
96
TABLE 3-3 NUMBER AND PERCENT OF MINORITIES AT COMPARABLE
SCHOOLS 2005-2006
Law
School
Total Full-Time
Faculty and
Administrators:
Fall 2005
Total Full-Time
Faculty and
Administrators:
Spring 2006
Arizona
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Michigan
Minnesota
North
Carolina
Ohio
State
Texas
UCLA
Wisconsin
60
49
53
60
74
58
52
65
51
55
61
60
57
51
7 (12%)
4 (8%)
5 (9%)
6 (10%)
6 (8%)
11 (19%)
6 (12%)
8 (12%)
6 (12%)
6 (11%)
6 (10%)
5 (8%)
10 (18%)
6 (12%)
12%
10%
10%
10%
8%
18.5%
12%
58
58
12 (21%)
12 (21%)
21%
79
84
70
73
82
67
8 (10%)
11 (13%)
10 (14%)
7 (10%)
9 (11%)
10 (15%)
10%
12%
14.5%
97
Number and Number and
Percentage of Percentage of
Minorities:
Minorities:
Fall 2005
Spring 2006
Average %
of
Minorities
for „05 and
„06
TABLE 3-4 NUMBER AND PERCENT OF MINORITIES AT COMPARABLE
SCHOOLS 1998-99
TOTAL FULL-TIME
FACULTY AND
ADMINISTRATORS
1998-1999
NUMBER AND
PERCENTAGE
OF MINORITIES
LAW
SCHOOL
AVERAGE %
OF
MINORITIES
FOR
„98 AND „99
ARIZONA
FALL „98
32
SPRING „99
34
FALL „98
5 (16%)
SPRING ‟99
5 (15%)
15.5%
ILLINOIS
39
40
7 (18%)
8 (20%)
19%
INDIANA
44
41
2 (5%)
2 (5%)
5%
IOWA
48
48
5 (10%)
5 (10%)
10%
MICHIGAN
70
66
4 (6%)
8 (12%)
9%
MINNESOTA
38
40
4 (11%)
3 (8%)
9.5%
NORTH
CAROLINA
OHIO STATE
41
38
3 (7%)
3 (8%)
7.5%
39
38
4 (10%)
4 (11%)
10.5%
TEXAS
66
70
6 (9% )
5 (7%)
8%
UCLA
65
68
8 (12%)
9 (13%)
12.5%
WISCONSIN
49
48
6 (12%)
6 (13%)
12.5%
An important aspect of the College‟s efforts to support faculty diversity is its interest in hiring
persons with disabilities and its efforts to accommodate to the needs of disabled faculty. The
Law School provides computer equipment to meet the special needs of faculty with disabilities,
including voice software and special keyboard drawers, for example. The school has used the
flexibility accorded by the “Post Tenure Effort Allocation Policy” (PTEAP) policy to provide
accommodating teaching loads. Classroom and class time accommodations are also made.
Equipment is available in the classroom that provides greater flexibility in the use of traditional
or new teaching methods.
As noted above, the faculty includes seven clinicians who are in the clinic. Clinical Faculty
status was recently established on a University-wide basis. Although the primary teaching
responsibility of clinicians is in the clinical program, under collegiate policies clinical faculty are
permitted to teach traditional law school courses on a limited basis. Under the policy, several of
the clinicians regularly teach one traditional classroom course each year.
98
Not included in the tables above are the new LAWR instructors. As discussed elsewhere in
greater depth, the Law School has shifted its first year small section writing from regular faculty
to legal writing instructors. The 2006-07 year is the first year in which the change is being made,
and the number, qualifications, and status of the legal writing instructors has yet to be finalized.
All instructors in the 2006-07 year are on one year contracts, and some are part time. It is
anticipated that five legal writing positions will be established in total, with terms in office and
needed qualifications set in detail. The writing instructors are a net addition to the teaching staff
of the Law School, and space arrangements for them will also have to be addressed in the short
and long term. For now they are in temporary office space on the third and fourth floors.
The faculty has grown substantially in size since the designing of the Boyd Law Building in the
early 1980s. Faculty growth undoubtedly has several positive consequences, such as an improved
student-faculty ratio, greater diversity in subject matter expertise, the ability to offer a richer and
more varied curriculum, and enhanced mutual support for scholarship. Faculty growth has
resulted in overcrowding and physical space problems, and has put strains on the resources
available to support the work of the faculty. A space planning effort is now underway. It is
described in Chapter 8 of this report.
B. Faculty Responsibilities
The Law School has established policies with respect to a full-time faculty member‟s
responsibilities in teaching, scholarship and service. These policies can be found in the
Handbook
and
Materials
for
New
Faculty
located
at
http://www.law.uiowa.edu/documents/facultyhandbook.pdf. See Appendix 3-2. This document
provides important links to various University-wide policies.
C. Teaching
1. Evaluation
The primary mission of the Law School is teaching. There are two main sources that are used to
evaluate the effectiveness of teaching. Both of them support the conclusion that the faculty is
dedicated to, serious about, and successful in the teaching enterprise. The first source of
feedback is informal and anecdotal in nature. It starts with the faculty‟s shared commitment to
teaching – part of a longstanding institutional culture – and builds upon both the ongoing
discussions of teaching techniques and challenges engaged in by pairs and groups of faculty and
upon collaborative teaching opportunities – both jointly taught courses and collegial visitations.
This source of information does not provide enough data to gauge student satisfaction. Neither
does it establish whether or how much learning actually occurs in the classroom. Nonetheless, it
does make evident that faculty members put substantial thought, effort, and energy into
preparation for classes and the entire teaching enterprise. Put simply, our pride in the Law
School‟s time-honored commitment to teaching seems justified.
The second source of information concerning the quality of teaching is the formal student
evaluation process. In fact, these written evaluations of faculty performance provide the only
regularly available indicia of student perception of the caliber of teaching in the Law School. The
99
evaluation form employs a 5-point scale that ranges from 1 (poor) to 5 (outstanding). It asks
each student in each course to provide numerical ratings in response to three criteria: (1)
Instructor‟s Effectiveness; (2) Instructor‟s Knowledge; and (3) Quality of feedback for courses
with a writing or simulation segment.
The evaluation form also provides substantial space for students to provide written comments
and evaluation of the instructor‟s effectiveness, the quality of instruction on writing (for courses
with a significant writing component), the casebook or other course materials, and the efficacy of
the particular teaching techniques employed by the instructor. Typically, first year students are
more inclined to provide extended written feedback on the forms than upper-class students.
Students are asked to complete an evaluation form for each course during the final week of
classes each semester. The forms and numerical compilations of the ratings on the three criteria
cannot be distributed to a professor until final grades for the course have been submitted to the
Law School registrar. This policy is rigidly honored. To the administration and faculty‟s
knowledge, it has never been breached. The Dean has a longstanding practice of reviewing the
student evaluation forms for each course. Copies of the numerical compilations that are given to
faculty are also bound into volumes and placed on reserve in the Law Library. Students
interested in learning how their predecessors and peers have assessed particular faculty can
review these compilations.
100
TABLE 3-5 TEACHING EVALUATION DATA 2005-06
Regular
Faculty
SUMMER 2005
Course Size
< 19
Students
Quality
Teaching
Knowledge
Total
Courses
Mean
Median
Average/
Below*
Average/
Outstanding**
1
4.90
4.94
0%
90%
5.00
5.00
0%
100%
4.78
4.86
0%
78%
4.76
4.84
0%
76%
4.90
4.94
0%
90%
4.40
4.33
0%
40
4.67
4.70
0%
67%
4.84
4.91
0%
84%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
4.24
4.32
3%
43%
4.60
4.68
0%
65%
4.62
4.67
0%
29%
4.27
4.33
0%
46%
Feedback
Course Size
> 20
Students
Quality
Teaching
Knowledge
1
Feedback
Visiting/
Adjunct
Faculty
Course Size
< 19
Students
Quality
Teaching
Knowledge
3
Feedback
Course Size
> 20
Students
Quality
Teaching
Knowledge
4
Feedback
Clinic
Courses
Course Size
< 19
Students
Quality
Teaching
9
101
Knowledge
4.24
4.26
0
40
Feedback
3.93
3.94
11
27
0
Course Size
> 20
Students
Quality
Teaching
Knowledge
Feedback
Regular
Faculty
FALL 2005
Course
Total
Size < 19
Courses
Students
Quality
28
Teaching
Knowledge
Mean
Median
Average/ Average/
Below*
Outstanding**
4.31
4.38
1%
47%
4.75
4.82
0%
79%
Feedback
4.39
3.97
2%
49%
4.13
4.21
4%
40%
4.65
4.72
1%
71%
4.26
4.19
2%
46%
4.58
4.63
2%
65%
4.83
4.88
0%
85%
4.53
4.61
0%
59%
3.83
3.92
8%
31%
46
Course
Size > 20
Students
Quality
Teaching
Knowledge
Feedback
Visiting/
Adjunct
Faculty
13
Course
Size < 19
Students
Quality
Teaching
Knowledge
Feedback
Course
Size > 20
Students
Quality
Teaching
5
102
Knowledge
4.41
4.51
4%
57%
Feedback
3.73
3.81
7%
32%
4.35
4.38
0%
52%
4.34
4.38
0%
45%
4.04
4.00
0%
26%
Clinic
Courses
7
Course
Size < 19
Students
Quality
Teaching
Knowledge
Feedback
0
Course
Size > 20
Students
Quality
Teaching
Knowledge
Feedback
Regular
Faculty
SPRING 2006
Course
Total
Size < 19
Courses
Students
Quality
30
Teaching
Knowledge
Mean
Median
Average/ Average/
Below*
Outstanding**
4.34
4.40
2%
50%
4.37
4.43
0%
67%
Feedback
4.31
4.44
2%
50%
4.11
4.18
5%
42%
4.64
4.72
1%
73%
4.45
4.57
0%
63%
35
Course
Size > 20
Students
Quality
Teaching
Knowledge
Feedback
Visiting/
Adjunct
Faculty
Course
Size < 19
Students
22
103
Quality
Teaching
Knowledge
4.31
4.37
1%
50%
4.68
4.76
0%
75%
Feedback
4.22
4.28
2%
50%
3.98
4.06
5%
34%
4.53
4.64
0%
61%
4.06
4.14
7%
34%
4.33
4.48
0%
49%
4.55
4.68
1%
61%
4.24
4.40
0%
47%
10
Course
Size > 20
Students
Quality
Teaching
Knowledge
Feedback
Clinic
Courses
7
Course
Size < 19
Students
Quality
Teaching
Knowledge
Feedback
0
Course
Size > 20
Students
Quality
Teaching
Knowledge
Feedback
* Corresponds to scores of 1 or 2 on the 5 point scale.
** Corresponds to scores of 4 or 5 on the 5 point scale.
For the purposes of the following analysis, student evaluations of full-time faculty for the
courses taught during the 2005-06 academic year, including the January intersession, were taken
into account. It is fair to assume that these evaluations are fairly reflective of student evaluations
of faculty performance over the past several years. For that period, the mean score on
“instructor‟s effectiveness” was between 4.0 (“above average”) and 5.0 (“outstanding”) for over
50% of the courses. The mean score was between 3.0 (“average”) and 5.0 in well over 90 % of
the courses. Moreover, students perceive that the faculty is very knowledgeable concerning the
subject matter of their courses. For the 2005-06 academic year, the mean score on “instructor‟s
knowledge” was between 4.00 (“above average”) and 5.00 (“outstanding”) in over two-thirds of
the courses. The mean score was between 3.0 (“average”) and 5.0 for well over 90% of the
courses. The evaluation data in the Tables above demonstrate that the Iowa faculty is indeed
remarkably successful in its teaching.
104
Exceptionally positive student evaluations of the faculty‟s effectiveness and knowledge, of
course, do not constitute conclusive proof of success in the classroom. Numerical evaluations by
our students are taken seriously, as they should be. Nonetheless, many faculty place equal or
greater reliance on the nature and tenor of the comments provided in the open-ended sections of
the evaluation form. At least some are skeptical of numerical assessments, believing that they
may be colored by variables that do not truly measure the quality of teaching and learning going
on in the classroom. Moreover, anecdotal evidence suggests that a student‟s perception of and
conclusions about the efficacy of an instructor can change over time. Hindsight assessments
affected by other Law School experiences and sometimes by practical experience following
graduation have been known to differ from assessments made in the final week of a course.
Historically, the Law School has not had a systematic program for faculty visitation of
colleagues‟ classrooms. For the most part, the teaching that goes on in Iowa classrooms is unseen
by faculty other than the instructor. The visits that do occur have tended to be sporadic and
primarily the result of joint teaching endeavors. In addition, the technological resources in the
Boyd Law Building have enabled some faculty to view videotapes of their colleagues‟ classes.
The Teaching Improvement Committee has also actively encouraged classroom visitation on an
ongoing, voluntary basis. From time-to-time, the faculty has considered whether regular
classroom visits by peers would be a positive change. On the whole, the faculty has generally
concluded that the costs in terms of lost collegiality outweigh any potential benefits from such
visitation.
A greatly increased amount of peer classroom visitation (in-person or via tape recording) has
occurred during the past seven years due to the Law School‟s Peer Review Policy adopted
pursuant to University-wide policy. The periodic review of senior, tenured faculty required by
the university policy includes a classroom visitation requirement or a viewing of videotapes. The
amount of actual teaching observations under this policy, however, is not substantial.
In addition, a change to the tenure and promotion procedures since the last Self Study mandates
that a tenure candidate‟s teaching be observed and evaluated. This requirement can be satisfied
by actual, in-person observation or by review of videotapes of classes.
Therefore, through peer reviews and pre-tenure procedures, visitation in classes, or videotaping
for purposes of review, peer review has effectively become a systematic (though far from
regular) part of the Law School‟s evaluation of teaching.
2. Teaching Assignments
Well in advance of each academic year, the Dean solicits from faculty members their desires
regarding teaching assignments during the upcoming year. As a rule, actual assignments are
ultimately made by mutual agreement of the Dean and each faculty member. Faculty members
generally receive teaching credit according to the number of academic credits earned by students
enrolled in a course. Seminars that include a student option to write an up to three credit paper
are treated as the equivalent of a three credit course for purposes of determining a faculty
member‟s teaching load. Faculty members who are formal advisors to the law journals or the
moot court program may receive some teaching credit as well. Faculty members who teach fewer
105
than the usual twelve hours of class are assigned “independent study” teaching hours. Ostensibly,
this assignment obligates those faculty to supervise and grade an appropriate number of
independent research and writing projects. The increase in the number of faculty-supervised
writing credits that a student must complete has generated a substantial increase in the amount of
actual writing supervision faculty members must undertake. The new change in the first year
legal writing program (replacement of faculty with legal writing instructors) will reduce the
amount of faculty-supervised writing.
3. Work Load Distribution
As is typical in the legal academy, the Iowa faculty engages in three basic enterprises: teaching,
research and scholarship, and service. Among the top public law schools with which Iowa
compares itself, however, Iowa‟s longstanding twelve hour per year norm for faculty teaching
load is at the upper end. It may well be the highest expectation. In addition, the requirement for
direct faculty supervision of at least two upper division writing credits and the faculty‟s
involvement in the activities of the four law journals, the moot court program, the client
counseling program, and other aspects of the overall academic program reflect substantial
additional commitments to the teaching function of the Law School. Based on the time and
energy that the Iowa faculty devotes to a variety of teaching enterprises, there is good reason to
believe that the character and depth of the faculty‟s dedication to teaching is unique and
distinctive among upper-tier law schools.
Some faculty have expressed concern that there may be an imbalance in the teaching workload
among regular, non-clinical faculty. For at least three reasons, it is difficult to determine whether
there is merit to these concerns. First, faculty do not agree about the amount of effort required for
different types of courses (for example, small versus large sections; classes with multiple choice
examinations versus those with essay examinations; regular “lecture” classes versus seminars).
Second, there is a considerable amount of informal teaching by faculty that is not recorded and
cannot accurately be measured. Third, a one-year assessment could be quite misleading due to
idiosyncratic variations in teaching loads, enrollments, and other factors. Only a multi-year data
compilation and study could provide persuasive evidence regarding the issue of unequal
distribution.
In an effort to shed at least some light on the subject of teaching loads in the Law School,
teaching load data from the 2005-06 academic year has been assembled. The relevant numbers
are reported in the chart that follows. The simple purposes of this chart are to illustrate the
magnitude of the teaching loads carried by faculty and how the teaching responsibilities are
divided among faculty in a typical year. The meaning of the numbers is, of course, debatable.
106
TABLE 3-6 FORMAL TEACHING LOAD OF FACULTY MEMBERS 2005-06
Fall
Spring
Total
Acton
Trusts and Estates (3)
Clinic (3)
London Program (6)
12
Allen
Clinic (6)
Clinic (3)
Poverty Law Seminar (3)
12
Andersen
(50%. Admin)
Contracts II (3)
Contracts II (3)
6
Baldus
Crim Law (3)
Capit Punish Seminar (3)
PTEAP + unpaid lv
6
Bauer
Debt Collection (2)
Real Estate T & F (3)
Business Reorganizations (3)
Civ Proc (4)
12
Bezanson
First Amend. Sem (4)(12 stud)
PTEAP – 3
Con Law I (5)
9
Bibas
Unpaid leave
Pre-Tenure Leave
0
Blanck
PTEAP: no teaching
visiting away
0
Bohannan
Torts (small) (5)
(late change)
Copyrights (3)
Conflicts (3)
11
Bonfield
(50% Admin)
Admin Law (3)
Constit Law II (3)
6
Boyd
NonProfit Effectiveness I (3)
Non Profits seminar (3)
NonProfit Effectiveness II(3)
Cultural Property seminar (3)
12
Brinig
(25% Admin)
ADR (3)
Law and Econ (3)
Family Law (3)
9
Burton
Contracts I (3)
Law & Lit Seminar (3)
Contracts II (3)
Int‟l Commercial Arb (3)
12
Buss
Con Law II (3)
Education Law (3)
PTEAP: No teaching
6
Cain
(Univ Admin)
(Admin assignment)
(Admin assignment)
0
Carlson
Trade & Env. Sem (3) (full yr)
Int‟l Env. Law (3)
Civ Proc (6)
12
107
Fall
Spring
Total
Carrasco
Int‟l Bus. Trans. (3)
Contracts I (3)
Contracts II (5)
UI Center Int‟l Develop(1)
12
Cox
Clinic (6)
Clinic (3)
Poverty Law Seminar (3)
12
David
(75% Admin)
Univ. Admin
Intro. Pub. Int‟l Law (3)
3
Estin
Family Law (3)
Family Law World Comm (3)
Law Politics & Fam Sem (3)
Fed Indian Law (3)
12
Gaulding
Contracts I (sm) (5)
Ind Res (1)
Emp Dis Law (3)
Global EDL Sem (3)
12
Gittler
CDA
Mediation Theory/Pract (3)
Heath Care: Fraud & Abuse: (1)
Health Law & Policy Practicum
(9, 3 law)
6
Hines
(50% admin
lv)
Property I (3)
Property II (3)
6
Hovenkamp
Torts (3)
Anti-trust (3)
Property II (3)
Antitrust Sem. (3)
12
Janis
Patents (3)
IP Law (3)
Fac Scholar Leave
6
Jones
(Admin)
Admin.
Admin
0
Kurtz
Prop I (3)
Health Law (3)
payback of 2004 overload (6)
6
Linder
Labor Law (3)
Labor Stds Sem (3)
Contracts II (sm) (5)
Supp Writing (1)
12
Love
Torts (3)
Remedies (3)
Fed Cts (3)
Con Law II (3)
12
Matsumoto
Property II (3)
Ind Rsch (1)
Constit Law I (5)
State and Local Gov‟t (3)
12
McGuire
(75% Admin)
Trial Ad (2)
PTEAP (1)
Noblett-Feld
Clinic (6)
3
Clinic (6)
108
12
Fall
Spring
Total
Osiel
Intro to Pub Int‟l Law (3)
Int‟l Crim Law (3)
Remedies (3)
War, Peace, Military Aff sem
(3)
12
Pettys
Fed Cts (3)
Evidence (3)
CDA
6
Porter
Bankruptcy (4)
Maternity
4
Ind Rsch (1)
Raymond
Visiting away/ Admin leave
Visiting away
0
Reitz
(25% Admin)
Comparative. Law (3)
LL.M. Sem & Tut. (3)
Admin Law (3)
9
Sale
Corps I (4)
Contracts I (3)
no teaching: PTEAP
7
Sandler
Clinic (6)
Clinic (6)
12
Schantz
Supervise moot court (1)
Con Law I(5)
6
Schneider
Professional Respons (3)
Hist Crime & Punish. sem (3)
Pre-tenure leave
6
Schwartz
Clinic (6)
Clinic (6)
12
Sidel
Visiting away
Visiting Away
0
Smith
CDA
Employment Law (3)
Gender work & law sem (3)
6
Somek
EU Law (3)
Int‟l Law Seminar (3)
Int‟l Trd & Regional Int. Sem
(3)
Jurisprudence (3)
12
Stensvaag
Environmental Law (3)
Evidence (3)
Civ Pro (4)
Evidence (3)
13
Stone
Corps I (4)
Corps I (4)
Sec Reg (4)
12
Tomkovicz
Cri Law (3)
Crim Pro: Investigation (3)
CDA
6
Vandervelde
Prop I (5)
Law of the Frontier seminar (3)
Ind Rsch (1)
25% unpaid leave
8
109
Fall
Spring
Total
Ward
Basic Fed Tax (4)
Tax Bus. Ent. (4)
Basic Fed Tax (4)
12
Wetlaufer
Negotiations (3)
Forms of Argument (2)
Civ Proc (4)
Negotiations (3)
12
Whiston
Clinic (6)
Clinic (4)
Trial Ad (2)
12
Wing
Law in Muslim World (3)
Hum Rts Wld Comm (3)
Critical Race Theory (3)
Con Law I (3)
12
Yin
Pre-tenure leave
Con Law I (sm) (5)
Ind Rsrch (1)
6
Leaves from Teaching 2005-06
Baldus
Bezanson
Bibas
Blanck
Buss
Cain
David
Gittler
Janis
Kurtz
Pettys
Porter
Raymond
Sale
Schneider
Sidel
Smith
Tomkovicz
VanderVelde
Yin
Spring
Fall
Fall/Spring
Fall/Spring
Spring
Fall/Spring
Fall
Fall
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Fall/Spring
Spring
Spring
Fall/Spring
Fall
Spring
Spring
Fall
(25% PTEAP Adjustment, 25% Leave without Pay)
(PTEAP 3 hours)
(50% Leave without Pay, Pre-Tenure Leave)
(50% PTEAP Adjustment, 25% Leave without Pay on Grant)
(50% PTEAP Adjustment)
(Admin Assignment)
(Admin Assignment)
(Developmental Leave)
(Faculty Scholar Leave; 3rd of 3 semesters)
(50% payback for 2004 overload Adjustment)
(Maternity Leave)
(Visiting Away/Admin Leave, 50% Leave without Pay)
(50% PTEAP Adjustment)
(Pre-Tenure Leave)
(Visiting Away)
(25% Unpaid Leave)
(Pre-Tenure Leave)
As has been noted, the norm for teaching loads of full-time faculty during the Self Study period
has been 12 hours per year. Ordinary classroom courses are credited at the rate of one hour of
teaching credit for each hour per week that the class meets. Therefore, a normal three-hour
course meeting three hours per week will count as three teaching credits. Faculty also receive
110
three hours of teaching credit for teaching seminars. One hour of teaching credit may also be
awarded for serving as an advisor to various student co-curricular programs (one of the law
journals or the Moot Court program). Faculty whose total teaching credits do not amount to
twelve are ordinarily assigned teaching credits for the supervision of independent research
projects by students. Faculty who receive such credit are expected to supervise four independent
research projects for each hour of teaching credit awarded.
TABLE 3-7 TEACHING LOAD (Excl. Visitors) 2002-06
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06 (ABA)
FTE Faculty
39.75
36.75
37.50
43 (Fall)
HR Teaching
438.00
395.00
372.00
240 (Fall)
Avg. Teaching
Load
11.10
10.75
9.92
10.56 (AY)
During the 2005-06 academic year, there were fifty-two regular and clinical faculty members.
Only thirty-seven (71%) of those faculty members actually taught on a full-time basis during the
year. Nine had administrative appointments either within the Law School or elsewhere in the
University. In addition, seventeen faculty members were on paid or unpaid leave for part of the
academic year. The table above reflects calculated teaching load for tenured and tenure-track
faculty only in the 2002-03 to the 2004-05 years, and the total teaching resources calculation
used by the ABA for the 2005-06 year. By the ABA methodology, in the fall of 2006, all fulltime teaching resources yielded forty-three FTE faculty and teachers (adjuncts, visitors, clinic,
other full-time) who taught 240 credit hours, thus yielding a 5.58 hour teaching load, or 10.56
load for the 2005-06 year.
Taking into account all teaching resources (LAWR; part-time; adjuncts, etc.) and using the ABA
methodology, student enrollment during the 2005-06 academic year totaled 1261 FTE; teaching
FTE totaled 99.8 FTE, yielding a student-faculty ratio of 12.82. This ratio permits the faculty to
maintain its open door policy and to provide individualized attention to students in small group
settings.
The numbers, however, do not capture all of the teaching in the Law School. Many faculty spend
significant amounts of time reading student journal articles, supervising the development of
appellate advocacy problems, judging moot court briefs and arguments, and judging in the client
counseling and trial advocacy competitions. Once again, there is a sense among some faculty that
the burdens of this additional teaching are not shared equally. The concern is that those faculty
who carry the lion‟s share of the load are at a disadvantage in terms of available time for research
and scholarship.
In addition, members of the faculty spend considerable amounts of time in a variety of other
teaching or “quasi-teaching” enterprises, none of which are included in determining whether a
particular instructor is carrying the normal twelve hour credit load. By faculty rule, each member
of the faculty is obligated to judge two rounds of appellate advocacy (or do equivalent,
111
alternative service in the Moot Court Program) during both the fall and spring semesters. This
duty entails a commitment of one evening of oral argument judging each semester in addition to
the time spent reviewing relevant student briefs. Alternatively, a faculty member might agree to
assist in the preparation of a record and bench memorandum for an appellate advocacy problem
– an extremely time-consuming task. Some faculty who undertake this responsibility, still
volunteer to participate in judging arguments.
While the advisors for the four law journals at the Law School carry the major part of the burden
of reviewing and critiquing student notes and comments, other faculty are asked to and agree to
assist students who are engaged in writing for the journals. In addition, many faculty agree to
supervise independent research projects or individualized externships, but receive no formal
credit for doing so.
At the time of the 1999 Self Study, attention was focused on the student supervised writing
experiences in the co-curricular programs – the three journals then operating, the appellate
advocacy program, and the client counseling program. Specifically, the report noted that by
faculty rule adopted in the 1970s all student-supervised writing experiences in these programs
had to be reviewed by faculty. It then observed that since the adoption of that rule the number of
students earning academic and writing credit in co-curricular programs had grown substantially,
and that the result was a serious strain on the faculty‟s ability to provide the kind of close
supervision and review that is consistent with the Law School‟s goal of providing rigorous
faculty writing supervision for second- and third-year students. Moreover, concern was
expressed that the overuse of co-curricular activities to earn writing credits might have
inadvertently generated a culture in which students gave precedence to co-curricular projects and
allocated less time and effort to other facets of their educational program. Ultimately, the report
recommended that the faculty “consider all aspects of the upper level writing requirements and
particularly whether faculty supervision of writings in the co-curricular activities should
continue, and, if so, how the burdens of supervision can be equitably allocated among the entire
faculty.” In addition, the report urged the faculty to “consider whether other curricular changes
might be advisable to meet the goal of providing upper level students rigorous writing
experiences that are closely supervised by faculty members as part of each faculty member‟s
regular teaching load.”
In 1998, the faculty took action to implement some of these suggestions. The Law School
adopted a requirement that students earn at least two of the five required upper level writing
credits in faculty-supervised writing endeavors rather than student-supervised, co-curricular
programs. The change in the ground rules addressed the concern that too many students were
earning their upper level writing credits without adequate supervision, instruction, and oversight
by a faculty member. Educationally, this change has been seen as a quite positive step. On the
other hand, the need for all second- and third-year students to earn at least two writing credits
under the direct supervision of a faculty member (by means of seminar papers and independent
research papers, or drafting, for example), may put additional strain on already taxed faculty
resources. Moreover, it is unclear whether the burdens of the additional supervision that is
required will be distributed proportionately among the members of the faculty.
112
The concerns about burdensome and unequal teaching loads are currently being addressed by the
Dean and the faculty. The changes that have been proposed or are currently being effected are
discussed in Section G, below.
D. Scholarship
This section is intended to provide an overview of the scholarly accomplishments of the Iowa
faculty and to offer commentary and analysis on both the quantity and quality of Iowa law
faculty scholarship.
The complete faculty bibliography is attached as Appendix 3-3. The information is compiled
annually by the Iowa Law Library. The listing includes complete bibliographies of major legal
publications for each current Iowa faculty member. In addition, the Table below represents the
scholarship of the faculty by category for the period beginning in 1998-1999 and ending Oct. 1,
2006. The analysis that follows uses the information from the bibliographic listing to present an
overview of and commentary on the scholarly activities at Iowa over the Self Study period.
1. Overview and Commentary
A few very basic observations can be drawn from the Iowa Law School data from the Table
below.
113
TABLE 3-8 SCHOLARSHIP PUBLISHED BY IOWA FACULTY 1998-2006
[as of 10/1 each year]
[--/-- in last col. is without/with Bibas, Blanck, Brinig]
1998
Books - Academic
5
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
9
8
8
2
4
4
5
4
2
5
Books - Treatise
Casebooks – new
2005
2006
9
mos.
4
1
1
1
3/4
1
1
4
7
3
5
2
6
4
8
2
Chapters
6
9
14
8
18
15
9
12
7/8
Law Reviews and
55
39
36
54
52
46
44
21
24/29
Book Reviews
1
5
4
5
6
7
3
1
1
Reports
7
3
3
4
1
2
2
1
Published Testimony,
3
2
3
3
Casebook, Treatise
Editions (exc. Major)
Academic Journals
3
commentary
Legislation
1
1
Encyclopedia
0
1
2
4
3
1
First, the Iowa faculty continued its tradition of substantial publishing in academic law journals.
As the table reflects, Iowa faculty published 277/282 articles in academic law journals over the
Self Study period 2000-06.
Second, Iowa law faculty authored, co-authored, edited, or contributed to many book length
works (fifty-five/fifty-six books and eighty-three/eighty-four chapters of books), substantially
more than during the previous Self Study period. It appears that the faculty‟s publication efforts
shifted somewhat from publishing articles toward the publication of books.
Third, the law faculty‟s interdisciplinary orientation, and generally its expansion into forms of
scholarship that go beyond traditional legal scholarship forums, present difficult challenges for
adequately measuring scholarly output, especially by citation rates. The trend in publishing
among law faculty at the better law schools has been away from traditional student-edited law
reviews and toward books, writing in peer-reviewed journals in both law and other disciplines,
and even alternative media such as electronic publication. Our own commitment to
interdisciplinary research requires that scholarship outside of traditional legal sources be suitably
114
regarded. Thus any assessment of scholarly output must take into account the full range of genres
in which scholarship is published.
In addition, the University of Iowa‟s strategic plan has emphasized the relationship between the
eminence of scholarly institutions and the impact of their scholarship. The strategic plan
measures impact in part by counting the number of times members of its faculty are cited. The
plan‟s goal is to increase the rate of faculty citation by about ten percent over the next five years.
Scholarly impact data are discussed below in Section G. The Law School needs to discuss how
to create an environment that will enable it to achieve this goal, which might include such things
as promotion incentives or consideration of citation rates in lateral hiring. In addition, the Law
School still needs to consider how citation rates should be considered in its overall assessment of
the quality of scholarship, for the citation rate measure is far from flawless. For example, while
law review articles receive ample citation (although some periodicals and subject areas are cited
more than others), other forms of faculty publication such as casebooks, academic books, and
law reform activities are cited only rarely. Likewise, while writing on federal law or general law
and policy issues tends to be more widely read, single-jurisdiction scholarship, including
scholarship about Iowa law, is read by a much smaller audience and cited much less frequently.
One way to improve citation rates is to discourage people from doing such scholarship, but no
decision of that nature has been made.
Finally, as discussed below in Section G, the faculty are increasingly of the view that it is time
for the Law School to become more deliberate in formulating institutional goals for scholarship
and new policies that will assist the faculty in meeting those goals. The sections that follow seek
to provide a more concrete picture of the scholarly accomplishments of the Iowa law faculty over
the Self Study period, after which the discussion will turn to the future.
2. Law Review Articles
As is evident from the Faculty Bibliography and the individual faculty resumes, from 2000
through nine months of 2006, the faculty published articles in a wide array of journals, including
virtually all of the most distinguished law reviews and many interdisciplinary journals in, for
example, the fields of law and medicine, philosophy, communications, journalism, history and
the sciences.
Some 277/282 articles were published by Iowa faculty members during the 2000-2006 period.
Additionally, Iowa faculty published at least twenty-seven book reviews in academic law
journals and other academic journals. Most of the listed journals are student-edited law reviews,
not refereed journals. This is the principal, if not exclusive, forum for scholarship for most U.S.
law professors. Indeed, in many regards this is the preferred forum for many types of legal
scholarship. Publication in a leading law review is commonly regarded as a mark of prestige.
Moreover, publication in nearly any of the standard student-edited law reviews ensures that one‟s
scholarship will be available to a large audience of academics, judges, and practitioners
worldwide because work appearing in most such law reviews can now be accessed through online legal databases.
115
The listing of publications in the Faculty Bibliography clearly reflects the Iowa faculty‟s
expertise in and commitment to the enterprise of interdisciplinary scholarship. Many of the
articles, although published in law journals, are unquestionably interdisciplinary in that they
draw heavily on scholarly literature not necessarily associated with the legal discipline. For
example, disciplines as varied as history, art, psychology, medicine, philosophy, and engineering
and the sciences are all represented in the writings of Iowa law faculty.
The faculty‟s orientation towards interdisciplinary study is also manifested in the large number
of articles appearing in non-law journals. Such journals as NIEMAN REPORTS, THE JOURNAL OF
OCCUPATIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEDICINE, THE LARYNGOSCOPE, DAEDALUS, CURATOR,
THE JOURNAL OF SOCIOECONOMICS, THE JOURNAL OF ELDER ABUSE AND NEGLECT, THE
COMMUNITY HEALTH JOURNAL, LAW AND SEXUALITY, HUMAN RIGHTS QUARTERLY, THE
JOURNAL OF EMPIRICAL LEGAL STUDIES, THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NOT-FOR-PROFIT
LAW, RATIO JURIS, JURIDIKUM, ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, AND THE REVIEW OF LAW &
ECONOMICS, are among those in which Iowa faculty articles appeared in 2000-2006.
3. Books and Monographs
The January 1999 Report detailed a rich array of Iowa scholarship in addition to articles in
scholarly journals. A review of faculty bibliographies for 2000-06 reveals a similarly impressive
variety of these types of scholarship.
First, over the 2000-06 time period, Iowa faculty continued the tradition of substantial scholarly
contributions in the form of books and monographs in many areas of legal study. Specifically,
Iowa faculty authored, co-authored, or edited thirty books and monographs, published
predominantly by academic presses. Although comparative data are not available, experience
suggests that this level of productivity would place the Law School firmly among the top law
schools nationally. In addition, this productivity level represents a significant increase over that
reported in the previous Self Study report.
4. Chapters in Books
Iowa faculty also contributed substantially to edited collections published as books. Faculty
contributions to such works in the form of chapters, essays, or other contributions, such as entries
in scholarly encyclopedias or other reference works, number approximately eighty-three/eightyfour.
5. Treatises and Hornbooks
Several Iowa faculty members published, or updated with supplemental materials, a variety of
treatises and hornbooks during 2000-06. Treatises are comprised of original textual material and
are generally designed as critical research tools for practicing lawyers, judges, and legal
researchers. Hornbooks likewise are comprised predominantly of original textual material and
are directed primarily at students. Iowa faculty members took responsibility for writing or
updating at least eighteen treatises or hornbooks during 2000-06.
116
6. Casebooks
Law casebooks are directed to students, and are ordinarily the primary materials used in law
courses. Casebooks usually contain a combination of original textual material and edited
materials (judicial opinions, legislative and administrative materials, and so forth). During the
relevant time period, Iowa faculty members produced or supplemented thirty-five/thirty-six
casebooks.
7. Government Reports
Iowa faculty members during 2000-06 were regularly called upon to prepare formal reports to
government agencies, deliver written testimony, or draft legislation. Iowa faculty members were
involved in at least twenty-five such projects during 2000-06.
8. Conclusion
Over past decades, the Iowa Law School achieved national prominence as an outstanding
research institution. Iowa faculty have sought to build upon that reputation during the 2000-06
time period. What is perhaps most evident about faculty scholarship during this period is its
diversity – in form, subject matter, and viewpoint. The culture of diversity in scholarly pursuit at
Iowa remains vigorous. The focus on interdisciplinary scholarship remains strong. Book-length
projects, many offering cutting-edge theoretical treatments of their subjects, have become a
particular focus. While providing resources for scholarship is continually a challenge, scholarly
enterprise overall at Iowa appears to be in good health. Yet when judged by a number of
comparative measures discussed in Section G, the Law School‟s commitment to scholarship
needs to be strengthened.
E. Interdisciplinary Activities and Centers
1. Interdisciplinary Activities
The Law School remains committed to interdisciplinary education. Four members of the faculty
hold Ph.D.s at this time – Herbert Hovenkamp, Marc Linder, Mark Osiel, and Wendy Schneider.
Several members of the faculty hold academic appointments in other colleges of the University,
including the College of Medicine, the College of Public Health and the College of Nursing. The
Faculty Appointments Committee continues to seek out candidates holding both the J.D. and
Ph.D. degrees. In addition we have a number of faculty from other departments that hold zerotime appointments with our College, who may do research and teaching in legal areas and we
encourage them to attend our programs and to co-teach as well.
There are a number of interdisciplinary course offerings. These are the official cross listed
courses that faculty are now teaching: Comparative Law; Gender and the Law; Jurisprudence;
Federal Indian Law; Law & Civil Rights Movement in Alabama 1955-1965; and Non Profit
Organizations Effectiveness I & II. There are a number of other courses that are not officially
cross-listed but where the Law School permits non-law students to register. These courses
include Public International Law, Human Rights, and Law in the Muslim World.
117
Additionally, many faculty regularly include in their courses interdisciplinary materials relating
to various subjects including political science and theory, medicine, public health, history,
Islamic studies, economics, African studies, African-American studies, and Women studies.
Collegiate courses have been co-taught by faculty of the Law School with faculty from the
Colleges of Business Administration (economics), Liberal Arts (English, history, women‟s
studies, communication studies), Medicine , and Nursing. The Colleges of Law and Medicine
collaborate in a one-week seminar – Medical Seminar for Law Students, and the Colleges of Law,
Public Health, and Nursing collaborate in a semester-long course – Health Law and Policy
Practicum.
Faculty at the Law School are regularly involved with other segments of the University
community, including the College of Medicine, the College of Liberal Arts, the College of Public
Health, and the College of Nursing. A number of colleagues in the ILCP are affiliated with the UI
International Programs. Also, faculty are affiliated with interdisciplinary programs such as
African Studies, Women Studies, Sexuality Studies, and the new program in Middle East and
Islamic Cultures. Some faculty have sat on Ph.D. committees too. These associations enrich the
faculty and ultimately improve the quality of the teaching and research at the Law School.
Members of the faculty have taught undergraduate courses such as the Introduction to Women‟s
Studies, Introduction to African Studies, Introduction to the Society and Culture of the CIS, and
Introduction to German Culture.
2. Centers
Centers and outreach programs are an important element in the Law School‟s overall service to
the outside professional and civic communities. For many years the Law School was home to the
nation‟s first Agricultural Law Center. That center closed some years ago, but in the interim
period several new Centers and Institutes have arisen in such diverse fields as health law,
disability law and policy, not-for-profit entities, public international finance, and human rights
law. Due to space considerations, these auxiliary programs are outside the Boyd Law Building,
and enjoy increasing national and international recognition for their specialized research projects,
educational activities and service activities. Several of these resource centers have been very
successful in attracting competitive external grants from state, federal and private foundation
sources. The Centers will now be discussed in alphabetical order.
Larned A. Waterman Iowa Nonprofit Resource Center (INRC)
In 1996, Rawlings/Miller Professor of Law Willard L. “Sandy” Boyd, University of Iowa
President Emeritus, and President Emeritus of the Field Museum in Chicago, and Mark Sidel
commenced the teaching of a seminar in nonprofit organizations and philanthropy in the Law
School. Today they are joined in that Law School effort by Adjunct Lecturer Richard Koontz,
and Professors Pat Cain and Ethan Stone. More recently, Dean Jones has joined the faculty, and
she has an academic interest in the field of nonprofit organizations. In 1997 Professor Boyd was
invited by the then Dean of the Tippie College of Business (now Interim President) Gary Fethke
118
to initiate a course on Nonprofit Organizational Effectiveness with members of the Business
faculty.
The Larned A. Waterman Iowa Nonprofit Resource Center was created in 2000 and in 2005 was
given a $2,500,000 endowment by Mary Hubbell Waterman in memory of her late husband, a
distinguished Iowa lawyer and civic leader. Its missions are teaching, research and service and
its work is rooted in the work of University faculty in service to students and the citizens of
Iowa.
The Larned A. Waterman Iowa Nonprofit Resource Center is a University of Iowa
interdisciplinary collaboration to make more accessible educational and service programs
focused on strengthening the operational capacity of Iowa nonprofit organizations. The Center
works collaboratively with government agencies, nonprofit organizations and educational
institutions. The Center creates new knowledge through research activities and provides
information and training resources to help nonprofit organizations and interested persons
throughout Iowa. It seeks to build the capacity and develop the effectiveness of local
organizations and enhance the overall effectiveness of local organizations in building
communities. The Center also introduces students to the nonprofit sector and develops their
sense of public and community service.
Professor Boyd was the founder of the Center. While in Chicago he initiated a nonprofit class at
Northwestern Law School and participated in the early nonprofit developments at the Kellogg
School. Richard Koontz J.D. is the Coordinator of the Center. He was General Counsel of the
Field Museum and before that an associate with Goodwin, Procter in Boston. He is an adjunct
lecturer at the Law School, teaching nonprofit and cultural property law courses. Lon Moeller
J.D. is Co-Director of the Center and Clinical Associate Professor at the University of Iowa
Henry B. Tippie College of Business Administration. Jude P. West is Co-Director of the Center
as well. He is a Professor, Management and Organizations, Tippie College of Business
Administration.
The Center offers two courses: one is in the Law School entitled Nonprofit Organizations,
Foundations and Philanthropy, and the second is a University-wide course called Nonprofit
Organizational Effectiveness. The Law School seminar requires students to create a new
nonprofit organization or examine an existing nonprofit organization and then prepare a mission
statement, articles of incorporations, bylaws, and a 1023 application to the IRS for tax exempt
status. With these documents, they are able to prepare a memorandum to lay persons who are
organizing the nonprofit. This memorandum is designed to cover not only the legal points but
also the organizational issues that must be addressed at the beginning and throughout the lifetime
of the organization.
The University-wide course Nonprofit Organizational Effectiveness I and II is offered in two
semesters and is a graduate and upper division class. The course draws an enrollment of
between 135 and 150 students (including forty-sixty law students, who are graded by law
faculty). It is the most crosslisted course in the University, and it is taught by over twenty-two
volunteer faculty members from across the University and from nonprofit practice. Students are
119
of three types. In the case of Business and Law students, this course will be judged effective if
five years after these students are in their communities working, they are volunteering as board
members or in other capacities for their community organizations. The second group of students
are preparing for a profession where they are likely to be employed by a nonprofit. Because
nonprofit organizations are small, most of these “professional graduates” who go to work for a
nonprofit thinking that they are going to practice their profession will soon be drafted to take on
administrative duties, e.g. social workers, nurses, librarians, museum curators, performing artists,
urban and regional planners, recreation workers, religious studies graduates, and public health.
The third category of students is nonprofit staff, board members and volunteers who add real
experience to the class. This course is now online for people across the state, and one can earn a
certificate in Nonprofit Management. There is a related nonprofit concentration in the MBA
program.
The Law School provides the Center with six research assistants. These research assistants do
both practical and theoretical work. They staff a service desk at the Center which responds to
inquiries from nonprofits all over Iowa. They also maintain and operate the Center web site
which provides information to the entire state. They help prepare a quarterly newsletter to our
listserv of nearly 2000 people. The quarterly newsletter relates to issues of concern to the
nonprofit field. The Center also produces a monograph series.
In addition, law students played a pivotal role in the Governor‟s Task Force on the Role of
Nonprofit Organizations in Iowa chaired by Professor Boyd. One recommendation of that Task
Force was to create the “Iowa Principles and Practices for Charitable Nonprofit Excellence.” See
Appendix 3-4. Law students were involved in the preparation of these Principles and Practices
and are now participating in the creation of annotations which set forth the law governing
nonprofit organizations and good management practices.
The Nonprofit Center maintains active liaison with the Iowa State Bar Association. The Center
also biannually holds a CLE nonprofit program through the Law School.
Several years ago, one of the Nonprofit Center‟s research assistants enlisted the support of the
Iowa Student Bar Association to create a pro bono student recognition program. This program
encourages and recognizes their volunteer service. They are given a cord to wear on their
graduation gown.
A recent group volunteer project was the Katrina spring semester program cosponsored by the
ISBA. Over forty students raised the funds and gave the time to enable them to serve residents
of New Orleans during their spring break.
The public commitment of Iowa students is continually apparent in the atrium of the Law
School. Every day, every week students groups with different missions are soliciting the time
and funds of their peers to engage in community service, sometimes of a legal nature, sometimes
of a pure service nature.
120
In response to this student demand, Dean Jones and Dean McGuire are in the process of
introducing service learning to our law students. We already do so in the Nonprofit
Organizational Effectiveness course where actually take on a project of really community
organization.
A course slot has been opened in the second semester for first year students to engage in service
learning as one of the available electives. This opportunity for civic engagement has much
potential, and we wish to develop it to its fullest. In addition, the Law School is developing new
volunteer opportunities for second and third year students.
Other law schools are beginning to move in the service direction we have charted. The
University of Michigan Law School has announced the appointment of an Assistant Dean for
Civic Engagement, as has the University of Southern California, Gould School of Law.
Upon the recommendation of the Governor‟s Task Force on the Role of Charitable Nonprofit
Organizations in Iowa, the Center under the leadership of Richard Koontz created the Iowa
Principles and Practices for Charitable Nonprofit Excellence. See Appendix 3-4. They are
posted on the Iowa Secretary of State‟s web site as well as the web site of the Center. In June
Center staff traveled to seven different Iowa localities to train people in the Principles and
Practices. Overall Center staff has taught well over a thousand people in the Principles and
Practices, and have distributed 10,000 hard copies to nonprofit people and are now printing a
second 10,000. These go to board members, staffs and volunteers. The Governor‟s Task Force
charged the Nonprofit Center to establish a Register of Accountability. Iowa is committed to
self-regulation.
Professor Boyd has been active in the national self-regulation discussion of the U.S. Senate
Finance Committee and Independent Sector. Professors Sidel and Boyd serve on the
Independent Sector Working Group on Self-Regulation and Boyd served on the Small
Organization Working Group.
The Nonprofit Center is funded largely through contributed time of faculty and research
assistants across the University. In addition to the Waterman endowment, the Law School
provides a small general expense fund and the University Division of Continuing Education
provides the technical staff that operates the web site and publishes the quarterly newsletter. In
addition the Center depends on earned income, foundation grants and government contracts.
The Center works closely with the Extension Service of Iowa State University and the graduate
academic programs at Iowa State University and the University of Northern Iowa.
Recently, the Nonprofit Center has become affiliated with the University‟s fifty year old Institute
of Public Affairs, which with its budget has been moved administratively to the Law School.
Willard Boyd serves as its director. The city manager of Marion, Iowa, has been appointed
Associate Director. The Law School is collaborating closely with the University‟s Urban and
Regional Graduate Program and the Department of Political Science. In the past the Institute has
had a very close relationship with the Law School by providing opportunities for law students to
121
do research on local law publications. Iowa has a strong local government ethic. County and
municipal administrators and councils take great pride in the quality of their public service.
Law, Health Policy, and Disability Center (LHPDC)
The Law, Health Policy, and Disability Center is a leader in law, technology, education and
research. It is focused on improving the quality of life for persons living with disabilities. Based
at the University of Iowa Law School, with offices in Washington, D.C., the Center concentrates
on public policy and its impact on persons with disabilities, with an emphasis on employment,
self-determination and self-sufficiency.
The Iowa based interim Co-Director is James Schmeling, J.D. He also holds an adjunct
appointment in rehabilitation counseling at the College of Education. The Washington D.C.
interim Co-Director is Michael Morris, J.D. Helen Schartz, Ph.D., J.D. is the Director of
Research. David Klein, Ph.D., is the Director of Technology. The Center founder was Professor
Peter Blanck, J.D., Ph.D. He left the Law School in 2005 to become a University Professor at
Syracuse University, but remains an affiliated researcher, and his Burton Blatt Institute at
Syracuse is a strong collaborator with the LHPDC.
The Center‟s unique location in a Law School and its partnerships with colleges of education and
public health promote multidisciplinary approaches to research, education and outreach. Over the
past seven years, using a seminar and team approach with real-world projects, it educates the
next generation of legal, rehabilitation, and other professionals who will influence public policy
through their work. Several students serve as research assistants each year, and collaborate with
graduate students in multiple disciplines.
The Center collaborates with professionals in law, health care, public health, rehabilitation, and
workforce development; policymakers at the federal and state levels; non-profit philanthropic
organizations interested in disability, health care, and employment issues; major global
corporations and small businesses; disability-related organizations and Centers for Independent
Living.
Work at the Center includes basic research, including legal and social science research,
education, training, technical assistance, and outreach. The Center publishes in both nonreviewed and peer-reviewed journals to share our research outcomes.
Center staff specialize in:
Examining the full spectrum of public policy from initial conceptualization to later
interpretations in the courts and reformulation
Studying, evaluating and providing assistance in the passage of laws, the regulatory
process, and the implementation at federal, state and local levels
Evaluating the impact of public policy on business practices in the hiring and
accommodation of persons with disabilities
122
Conducting research studies to improve understanding of the relationship of selected
federal and state policies on the social and economic independence of persons with
disabilities
Using accessible technology to disseminate findings, conduct research, and provide
training, the Center disseminates its findings to sponsors, partners, collaborators, and the
public through presentations, publications, and other activities. It invites public comment,
feedback and discussion.
The Center holds grants and contracts with the U. S. Department of Labor, the U.S. Department
of Education, the National Center on Workforce and Disability, West Virginia University, and
several other funders at the state and national level to conduct research, evaluation, technical
assistance, and training. It employs over a dozen researchers. Additionally it houses a computerassisted telephone survey center which focuses on disability research, unique in the country. The
Center subcontracts with several other institutions to conduct research, including The George
Washington University, Syracuse University, the National Opinion Research Center, the World
Institute on Disability, the National Disability Institute, the National Federation of Community
Development Credit Unions, Southern New Hampshire University‟s School of Community and
Economic Development, and others.
National Health Law and Policy Resource (NHLPR) Center
The NHLPR has become a nationally recognized “think tank” and compiled a highly impressive
record of achievements. During the 2004-2005 academic year, the NHLPR Center marked the
20th anniversary of its affiliation with the Law School. Its mission is to promote laws and public
policies that foster and facilitate accessible, affordable and quality health care for all Americans,
particularly vulnerable and disadvantaged populations. It furnishes a non-partisan forum for
informed dialogue, based on the best available data and information, between academics,
practitioners and public policy makers on important health law and policy issues.
Professor Josephine Gittler of the Law School and the University of Iowa College of Medicine‟s
John C. MacQueen, M.D., founded the NHLPR Center. Professor Gittler, who is the Wiley B.
Rutledge Professor of Law, serves as Director of the Center, and Dr. MacQueen, who is
Professor Emeritus of Pediatrics, serves as Co-Director of the Center. Kitty Buckwalter is also
Co-Director. The Center was originally known as the National Maternal and Child Health
Resource Center, and its original focus was the expansion and improvement of health and healthrelated services for mothers and children, including children with disabilities and chronic
illnesses. Over the years, however, the Center‟s focus broadened. Today the Center maintains the
following programs: the Maternal and Child Health Program, the Program on Health Care for the
Aging, the Rural Health Care Program, and the Health Care Conflict Management Program.
A core activity of the Center is conducting research and demonstration projects involving health
law and policy. Other core activities are the provision of education and training and the provision
of technical assistance and consultation to public policy makers, third-party payers of health
services, health-care administrators, providers of health services and related services, health-care
consumers and health-law practitioners. The Center‟s Health Care Conflict Management
123
Program also provides facilitation and mediation services for prevention and resolution of health
care disputes. Another Center activity is the operation of an Information Clearinghouse for a
variety of health law and policy topics. These activities are externally funded through grants and
contracts.
As of 2004, the latest year for which statistics are available, the Center had issued thirty-one
publications widely distributed nationwide, and Center staff members and consultants had
authored, co-authored or edited thirty-four publications issued by other entities. Center personnel
had made nearly 400 presentations at national, regional and statewide conferences and
workshops, and they had participated in more than 170 congressional hearings, forums and
briefings and state legislative hearings, forums and briefings.
The Center has had a major impact on public policy and law. A great deal of this impact is
attributable to the Center‟s success in translating the results of research and demonstration
projects into the enactment of legislation and the implementation of legislation. A specific
illustration is the Center‟s intensive and long-term efforts to reform the financing, organization
and delivery of health services and other needed services for children with special health-care
needs and their families. These efforts began in the mid-1980s and extended through the 1990s.
The Center initially conducted a project, with funding from the Federal Maternal and Child
Health (MCH) Bureau, delineating future directions of services for children with special healthcare needs. This project led to a national initiative, on the part of the U.S. Surgeon General, the
Law School, thirty-five Attorney General‟s Offices and the Federal MCH Bureau, calling for the
development of community-based systems of services that are comprehensive, coordinated and
family-centered for these children and families. The Center acted as the coordinator of a national
U.S. Surgeon‟s General Conference, with more than seventy-five cosponsors, which launched
this initiative.
In connection with this initiative, Professor Gittler then drafted legislation amending the Title V
Maternal and Child Health Services Block Grant so as to mandate states receiving federal
funding under the block grant to develop such systems of services, and she was instrumental in
securing congressional enactment of this legislation. After the enactment of the legislation, Dr.
MacQueen and Professor Gittler assisted the Federal MCH Bureau in planning and carrying out a
series of activities to guide the states in implementation of the new systems development
mandate, and the Center subsequently administered a project for the Federal MCH Bureau that
furnished states with extensive education and training and technical assistance and consultation
to enable them to implement this mandate.
During the past two decades, the Center also conducted a number of other externally funded
projects. Some of the subjects with which past projects have dealt are: legal and public policy
issues related to HIV infection among pregnant women, adolescents and children; legal and
public policy issues related to pregnant women with substance abuse problems and infants
exposed to drugs in utero; adolescent health care decision-making and parental consent and
notification requirements; various aspects of implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act; legal and public policy issues related to the provision of health services to
124
children in public school settings; models for comprehensive conflict management systems in
managed (health-) care settings; alternative dispute resolution in managed (health-) care settings;
and judicial review of medical malpractice awards.
The Center, in collaboration with the Urban Institute, recently completed a project examining
the effectiveness of state medical licensure boards in disciplining physicians for lack of
competency. The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Evaluation and Planning of the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services funded this project, which was part of a large
exploration of ways to deter medical errors and to assure better quality of medical care.
Another current Center project is directed at encouraging the pro bono representation of
individuals with health problems in need of legal advocacy. This project was undertaken for the
Health Law Section of the American Bar Association.
Still another current Center project is examining privacy and confidentiality issues posed by the
mandatory reporting of cancer cases to state registries and the use of data in these registries for
public health surveillance and research. This project involves collaboration with the University
of Iowa College of Public Health and is funded by the Federal Centers for Disease Control.
The Center recently launched a major nursing home reform project. This project is being
conducted in collaboration with the University of Iowa John A. Hartford Center of Geriatric
Nursing Excellence as well as four other centers around the country. The Center‟s focus is
governmental approaches at the federal and state levels to: (1) protecting nursing home residents
from abuse and neglect and assuring their safety; and (2) improving the quality of care and life
of nursing home residents The project receives and will receive funds from private foundations.
A hallmark of the Center is its interdisciplinary approach to projects. The Center‟s staff and
consultants have been drawn not only from the discipline of law but also from the disciplines of
medicine, nursing, public health, special education and early childhood education, social work,
psychology and business administration. The Center‟s key staff members all have distinguished
reputations in their respective fields.
In addition to Professor Gittler and Dr. MacQueen, University of Iowa faculty members serve
as Resource Center staff members. They include Kathleen C. Buckwalter, R.N., Ph.D., who is a
Center Co-Director; Claibourne I. Dungy, M.D., M.P.H., who is a Center Senior Associate
Director; Rachel Anderson, Ph.D., who is a Center Associate Director and Brenda Cruishank,
M.D., who is a Center Senior Associate. Buckwalter is Professor of Nursing at the University of
Iowa College of Nursing, where she directs the Hartford Center for Geriatric Nursing
Excellence, and she served as University of Iowa Associate Provost for the Health Sciences for
the seven-year period from 1997 to 2004. Dungy is a Professor of Pediatrics at the University of
Iowa College of Medicine and UIHC. Anderson is Associate Professor of Health Management
and Policy at the University of Iowa College of Public Health. Cruishank is Professor Emeritus
of Pediatrics at the University of Iowa College of Medicine.
125
The Center also has employed and continues to employ a number of research associates and
assistants, who are Law School graduates and students. Finally the Center draws on the
knowledge and expertise of a multidisciplinary team of consultants.
In order to more effectively fulfill its mission, the Center regularly collaborates with a wide and
diverse array of national, regional and state agencies, institutions and organizations at other sites.
Equally important, the Center is a resource for and has collaborative relationships with the
University of Iowa health sciences colleges.
The Center‟s affiliation with the Law School has made a significant contribution to enrichment
of the curriculum. Among the Law School courses which are a direct outgrowth of Center
activities are the Health Law and Policy Practicum and Federal Regulation of the Health Care
Industry: Health Care Fraud and Abuse. Another product of Center activities is a Child and
Family Advocacy Clinic, which gives law students, under law faculty supervision, experience in
representing children and families seen in UIHC pediatric clinics. Over the past 20 years, Dr.
MacQueen, as well as other Center personnel, have co-taught and participated in Law School
courses taught by Professor Gittler. Center projects likewise have generated many opportunities
for law faculty and law students to engage in health law and policy research.
University of Iowa Center for International Finance and Development (UICIFD)
In 1998, Professor Enrique Carrasco became the first academic to produce an interactive web site
on international finance and development designed for use by the layperson. At its inception the
web site featured the E-Book on International Finance & Development, an e-book of over 300
pages, written by Professor Carrasco and a group of his students, that explains the complex
world of international finance and development in plain language. The posting attracted so much
international attention that Professor Carrasco and his students decided to add features to the web
site. Each feature is intended to educate the layperson so that those who make use of the web site
will be better able to participate in the discourse of global governance as it relates to international
finance and development. The site has received hundreds of thousands of “visits” from around
the globe.
Given the web site‟s popularity and Professor Carrasco‟s teaching and research in public and
private international finance as well as development, soon after the posting of the E-Book he
established, and is the Director of, The University of Iowa Center for International Finance &
Development. The Center‟s purpose is to enhance the Law School‟s international law program
through research as well as sponsoring conferences and speakers. Thus far, it has sponsored two
major conferences on Cuba and China. The Center has also made public presentations in the
U.S. and abroad.
The Center currently has fourteen staff members, who serve as Professor Carrasco‟s research
assistants. Working collaboratively, the staff members educate themselves and the global
community on matters relating to international finance and development.
126
The Center‟s web site (http://www.uiowa.edu/ifdebook/) currently is comprised of the following
main features:
The E-Book on International Finance & Development
This is a substantial work (300 pages) that covers major aspects of public international finance
and international development. Coverage includes the roles of the IMF (International Monetary
Fund) and the World Bank in a globalized economy as well as the Mexican and Asian financial
crises. Professor Carrasco and his staffers intend to add a new part to the E-Book by the end of
the current academic year. The new material will cover developments in international finance
and development over the past six years. The new part will also include a chapter explaining the
development theory of Amaryta Sen.
Issues - Periodically The Center posts a detailed “issue” on a topic of current importance,
such as Cuba, globalization, and China.
News & Developments - The Center‟s “blog” with weekly postings on current events.
Conferences - Information regarding the Center‟s conferences, its most recent addressing the
rule of law, the financial sector, and security in China.
Briefing Papers - Concise explanations of topics such as debt relief and the World Bank‟s
LICUS program.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) - Answers questions such as “What are Capital
Controls?” and “What is a Hedge Fund?”
Links - Hundreds of links to other web sites organized under many topics, such as
“indigenous groups,” “law and development,” and “non-governmental organizations.”
The Center intends to debut a new feature, “On the Ground,” in the near future. The feature will
provide posts by students and others discussing their actual experiences with development issues.
The University of Iowa Center for Human Rights (UICHR)
The UICHR, founded in late 1999, is a direct outgrowth of Global Focus: Human Rights ‘98, a
year-long University of Iowa commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the UN General Assembly 10 December 1948.
Initiated by Law School Professor Burns H. Weston (now Bessie Dutton Murray Distinguished
Professor of Law Emeritus and UICHR Senior Scholar) together with a multidisciplinary group
of faculty, its mission is to assist in the promotion and protection of human rights at home and
abroad by providing distinguished multidisciplinary leadership in human rights research,
education, and public service to the University of Iowa, its surrounding community, the State of
Iowa, and beyond. To this end, it attends to all categories of human rights, beginning with “first
generation” civil and political rights, while paying special attention to “second generation”
economic, social, and cultural rights and “third generation” solidarity or community rights.
127
In recognition of the multidisciplinary nature of the human rights field, the Center is not under
the administration of the Law School, but operated under the jurisdiction of the University‟s
International Programs. Professor Weston was the founding director of the Center for six years
and is currently serving as the interim Director since the recent death of Director Ken Cmiel of
the UI Department of History. Two members of the Law School faculty, Adrien Wing and Mark
Sidel, serve on the UICHR‟s Executive Board in addition to Professor Weston. Amy Weismann,
a Law School graduate, is the full-time Deputy Director of the Center, and several law students
consistently serve as research assistants there.
The UICHR is guided by the basic tenets of a free society to which the University of Iowa is
committed. In fulfilling its mission, it therefore continuously revisits even the most fundamental
aspects of human rights, treating human rights not as a corpus of fixed thought and action, but as
a set of assumptions and choices that are open to constant rethinking because of ever-evolving
ideas, conditions, and needs.
Following this approach, the UICHR:
• engages in a diverse array of research, teaching, and other activities that are designed to
highlight and consider, constructively and critically, the problems and prospects of human rights
worldwide;
• nurtures trans-disciplinary and inter-institutional collaboration that seeks, among other things,
to integrate artistic and literary viewpoints with legal, political, and socioeconomic human rights
discourse;
• encourages the active participation of faculty, students, and others both within and beyond the
UI campus in the conception and execution of its diverse activities; and
• shares information with both human rights specialists and the general public about its activities
and about human rights issues and developments generally.
Through the support of its Friends, the UICHR also awards prizes for human rights scholarship
to deserving students. The UICHR makes a self-conscious effort to involve students in its
activities and to reach out to local citizens and citizen groups not officially affiliated with the
University of Iowa to facilitate its mission.
Finally, believing that the broad dissemination of human rights information is central to the
advancement of human dignity, the UICHR makes every effort to report human rights news and
views and to respond to informational inquiries and requests from its neighbors near and far.
More about the Center‟s programs can be found on its web site: http://www.uichr.org/.
128
F. Service
The faculty takes its service obligations seriously. Faculty members devote time, energy, and
expertise to a wide range of activities within the Law School and the University of Iowa.
Moreover, they lend their talents to a variety of enterprises and undertakings in the larger
community such as the Association of American Law Schools, local, state, and national bar
associations, public organizations, governmental bodies, and entities in the private sector.
Faculty service involvements are set fourth in detail in the resumes attached as Appendix 3-1 to
this report. As those vitae illustrate, nearly all members of the faculty are engaged in some
service outside the Law School itself. The object in this section is simply to summarize some
selected areas where faculty service has been most evident. The following constitutes a
nonexhaustive list of some of their activities.
In addition to substantial committee work within the Law School, the faculty has been actively
involved in service to the University of Iowa. Members of the law faculty have served as
members of the Faculty Senate and Faculty Council and as Presidents of the Faculty Senate.
Faculty have served also as Interim Directors of the Museum of Natural History, Old Capitol
Museum, and the Center for Human Rights.
They have also served as Chairs of the: Presidential Search and Screen Advisory Committee;
Gender Equity Task Force; President‟s Ad Hoc Budget Planning Advisory Committee; Ad Hoc
Committee to Review Clinical Track Faculty; Tenure Clock Committee; General Education
Fund Task Force; University Research Council; University Faculty-Staff Budget Committee; Ad
Hoc Investigative Committee; Search Committee for University Registrar; Capital Projects
Review Committee; Provost‟s Task Force on the Writing University; Special Committee on
University Tenure and Promotion Decision-Making Guidelines; University Diversity Task
Force; Committee to Review the University Financial Aid Office; Ad Hoc Committee for the
Non-Renewal of Athletic Grants-In-Aid; Student Welfare Committee; and the Non Resident
Tuition Committee. One colleague chaired a university wide committee whose charge was to
review and evaluate the office of the General Counsel to assist President Skorton in his selection
of Mark Schantz' successor.
Colleagues have served on a multitude of University committees, including, for example, the:
University Strategic Planning Committee; Committee Awarding Research Grants; Social
Science Research Committee; Advisory Committee of the University Museum; Committee on
the Selection of Central Academic Officials; Honorary Degrees; Committee on Intellectual
Property Policy; Search Committee for the University of Iowa Chief Information Officer;
Provost Search Committee; General Counsel Search Committee; Research Misconduct
Investigative Committee; Committee to Review the Office of the General Counsel; Search
Committee for Director of Office of Affirmative Action; NCAA Accreditation Review Gender
Equity Committee; President‟s Committee on Athletics, Division of Continuing Education
Advisory Committee; Financial Aid Advisory Committee; Faculty Senate Committee on
Committees; Board in Control of Athletics; Governmental Relations Committee; Study Abroad
Program Committee; Investment Advisory Committee; Committee on Funded Retirement and
Insurance; Review Committee for Opportunity at Iowa; College of Liberal Arts Collegiate
Review Committee; Tuition Study Task Force; Post-Grutter Diversity Review Task Force;
129
Social Science Funding Programs Review Committee; Research Foundation Board; Campus
Planning Committee; Universal Access Support Group; Counsel on Disability Awareness;
International Programs Executive Committee; Obermann Center for Advanced Studies Advisory
Board; Faculty Judicial Commission; Human Subjects Institutional Review Board; University
Research Misconduct Committee; and Office of General Counsel Review Committee.
One professor has served as mediator for the Faculty Senate Judicial Commission, and another
has been on the Executive Committee of the Center for Global and Regional Environmental
Research. At least two have served terms as University Ombudsperson. Two currently are on the
Board of the UI Center for Human Rights, and one colleague has served on the Board of the
Iowa Humanities Council. Two faculty members are currently on leave from the Law School in
order to serve as Associate or Vice Provosts in the Provost‟s office. One faculty member has
served recently as Interim Provost, and another as Interim President of the University.
Several colleagues have been active in Iowa City area itself, including terms on the governing
bodies of the: Iowa City Foreign Relations Council; Riverside Theatre; Iowa City Public Library
Foundation; Domestic Violence Prevention Center; United Way for Johnson County; and the
Hawkeye Area Boy Scouts. One colleague has been Chair of the Neighborhood Housing
Relations Task Force. Another was a founding member of the Iowa City Police Citizens
Review Board, while one serves on the Johnson County Courthouse Security Committee.
Faculty members have been active on the county and state level. They have served on the: Iowa
Public Television Foundation Board; Johnson County Bar Association Grievance Committee;
Community Foundation of Johnson County; Iowa Coalition against Domestic Violence Board;
and on the Board of the Iowa Peace Institute. One faculty member has chaired the Iowa Uniform
Law Commission.
Other faculty members have served the Iowa State Bar Association in several capacities,
including the: Title Standards Committee; Committee on Article 2A of the Uniform Commercial
Code; Volunteer Lawyers Project Board; Legal Heritage Committee; Pro Se Litigation Task
Force; Judicial Compensation Task Force; and the Committee on Probate. Colleagues have also
served on the: Iowa Supreme Court Commission on Planning for the 21st Century; Dean Mason
Ladd Inn of Court; Iowa Supreme Court Advisory Committee on the Iowa Rules of Evidence;
and Iowa Rules of Professional Conduct Monitoring Committee. One member also serves on the
Stanley Foundation Board as well as the United Nations Association Advisory Council State
Association.
Some colleagues have participated in drafting legislation, including the: Iowa Civil Rights Act,
Iowa Open Meetings Law, and Amendments to the Iowa Administrative Procedure Act. One has
also served as General Counsel on the Administrative Procedure Act Joint Committee of the
Iowa General Assembly. He was also special counsel to the State of Iowa Executive Branch.
Iowa faculty have also chaired gubernatorial task forces, including the: Governor‟s Task Force
on Nonprofit Organizations; Iowa Governor‟s Committee on the Public Records Law; and Iowa
Governor‟s Task Force on Uniform Rules of Agency Procedure. Colleagues have served on
commissions such as the: Iowa Commission on the African American Prison Population; Iowa
Learns Council; and the Iowa Commission on Uniform State Law.
130
Several members have been selected for the CIC Academic Leadership program. Most have
entered administrative careers.
Faculty members have also devoted substantial energies to the professional academic activities
of the Association of American Law Schools, with two (David Vernon and Bill Hines) serving
as President of the AALS. Many others have served on the Executive Committee, as members of
various sections, and as Chairs of the following sections: Business Associations; Comparative
Law; Contracts; Gay and Lesbian Legal Issues; International Human Rights; Minority Groups;
Remedies; Securities Regulation; Torts and Compensation Systems; Law and Social Science;
and Women in Legal Education. One faculty member has served as AALS Delegate to the
American Counsel of Learned Societies.
Moreover, faculty have organized or participated in a number of AALS programs, including
programs on: Criminal Law; Communications Law; International Arbitration; the Uniform
Commercial Code; Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Scholarship; Joint Tenancy; Domestic Partner
Benefits-Tax Issues; Teaching to the Entire Class; Health Care Delivery and Liability; and The
Restatement of Torts. Faculty have spoken at many AALS Workshops, including: Criminal
Law; New Law Teachers; Experienced Law Teachers; Professional Development Workshop on
Sexual Orientation; and Clinical Law. Colleagues have also served on various AALS standing
committees, and been inspectors for the accreditation process, as well as members of the
Accreditation Committee.
Many faculty have also been active in various sections of the American Bar Association. Some
have served on ABA committees. For example, one colleague was the Chair of the Section of
Administrative Law and Regulation Practice. Several have participated on panels and presented
papers at the meetings of the ABA or its sections concerning the following topics: Race
Discrimination in America‟s Capital Punishment Systems; The Uniform Correction or
Clarification of Defamation Act; Negotiation and Drafting of an International Commercial
Arbitration Clause; The Tax Consequences of Unmarried Couples Who Divide Property Upon
Termination of a Relationship; and Lawyers‟ Roles and Responsibilities in Private Practice and
Public Office. Several serve as ABA inspectors of law schools.
Faculty members have been involved in various kinds of public interest service. Some have
authored or consulted on amicus curiae briefs in civil rights cases before the United States
Supreme Court. Others have lent their talents to the Iowa Legal Services Corporation.
Faculty
have also participated as consultants to law reform associations, courts, and other government
agencies as well as in private litigation. One has been a member of the Administrative
Conference of the United States.
Many have participated in a variety of consultative groups of the American Law Institute,
including: The Principles of Family Dissolution Project; The Restatement of Property; The
Restatement of Torts (3d); The Restatement of Donative Transfers; and the UCC. Others have
served the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws as Reporters for
Uniform Acts.
131
Professors have lectured to judges on judicial discretion, taught at the National Judicial
Conference, advised the Department of Justice on antitrust litigation, and testified before
Congress and the Federal Trade Commission. One faculty member with special expertise in the
capital punishment area has served as a consultant to death penalty lawyers in several other
states. One has served as a consultant to the American College Testing Service.
Members of the Iowa faculty have served on a large number of professional boards and
professional and social service organizations. A non-exhaustive list includes the: ALI;
American Law Deans‟ Association; AAUP; American Trial Lawyers Association; American
Friends Service Middle East programs; Environmental Law Institute; National Institute for
Military Justice; American Society of Comparative Law; Law and Society Association; Law
School Admissions Council; American Society of International Law; National Conference of
Black Lawyers; Figge Museum National Advisory Council; Board of Directors of the Harry S.
Truman Library Institute; International Third World Legal Studies Association; National
Federation of State Humanities Council; Carver Trust; the Iowa Humanities Council; American
Association of University Professors‟ Ad Hoc Discrimination Committee; Linda Davis Kellett
Foundation; Muslim Women Lawyers for Human Rights Advisory Board; US Association of
Constitutional Law;
Latina/o Critical Theory Junior Faculty Development Workshop
Coordinating Committee; Workers Rights Consortium; and the National Association of
Consumer Advocates. Still others have been involved as officers and members of the Society of
American Law Teachers, including serving as Co-Presidents.
In addition, one member of the faculty chaired the Multistate Essay Examination Drafting
Committee, and another is involved as a member of the Multistate Essay Examination Drafting
Committee. Several colleagues have served on the advisory bodies for their alma maters
including the: BYU J. Reuben Clark Law School Board of Visitors, and Stanford Law School
Board of Visitors.
Professors have performed various kinds of “editorial” services. They have served on the Board
of Editors of the: University of Iowa Press; EVALUATION QUARTERLY; LAW AND HUMAN
BEHAVIOR;
JOURNAL OF PRODUCTS AND TOXIC LIABILITY; AMERICAN JOURNAL OF
COMPARATIVE LAW; BERKELEY WOMEN‟S LAW JOURNAL; LAW & SOCIETY REVIEW; LAW &
POLICY; SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR, ETHICS AND BEHAVIOR; EMPLOYEE RIGHTS AND EMPLOYMENT
POLICY JOURNAL; EXPERT EVIDENCE; and LAW & CRIMINOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY. Some have
been involved in peer review for the: Princeton Press; MIT Press; University of Nebraska Press;
Temple University Press; University of Illinois Press; University of Pennsylvania Press; NYU
Press; Aspen Publishing; JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY, SCIENCE AND LAW; LAW AND HISTORY
REVIEW; LAW AND ECONOMICS REVIEW; and LAW & HUMAN BEHAVIOR. Others have served as
members of the: National Advisory Board of LAW & SEXUALITY. Faculty members have also
served as reviewers for the National Science Foundation.
Finally, faculty members have been heavily involved in international service as well. One
international law expert has advised on the formulation of the South African, Palestinian, and
Rwandan Constitutions, while another has served as a consultant to the ABA‟s Asia Law
Initiative with respect to reform of Mongolian civil procedure. One colleague serves on the U.S.
State Department Presidential Cultural Property Advisory Committee. Another is President of
132
the Austrian Section of the International Association for Social and Legal Philosophy. One
colleague is academic director of the Philanthropy and Law in South Asia project funded by five
foundations. Another is a member of the International Advisory Council for the Toda Institute
for Global Peace and Policy Research, as well as State Chancellor of the International
Association of Educators for World Peace. One colleague is a member of the International
Centre for Dispute Resolution Panel of Arbitrators. Consultancies have included the:
Government of Canada; Serious Organised Crime Agency of United Kingdom; United Nations;
United Nations Development Program; U.S. State Department; ABA Asia Law Initiative; Aga
Khan Foundation; Asia Foundation; Asia Pacific Philanthropy Consortium; Asia Development
Bank; Center for Educational Exchange with Vietnam; Oxfam International; Pakistan Centre for
Philanthropy; Vietnamese Ministry of Justice; and the World Bank. Needless to say, colleagues
have organized and participated in many conferences around the world.
G. Balance of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service
As part of the University of Iowa, a major research university, the Law faculty strives to carry
out three distinct, but complementary, responsibilities – teaching, scholarship, and service. A
fundamental premise of such a university is that teaching and scholarship are particularly
reinforcing of one another. It seems fair to say that most, if not all, faculty find their teaching
enhanced by scholarly pursuits and their scholarship enriched by their teaching activities. As
indicated in the previous section devoted to teaching, the Iowa faculty has always been, and
continues to be, deeply committed to excellence in teaching. This devotion is evinced by the
first-year small section writing program (now taught by writing faculty, some of whom are
affiliated with the Iowa Writers Workshop), the additional requirement of upper level faculty
supervised writing credits, the policies, programs, and institutional ethic that promote close
interaction between faculty and students, the excellent student-faculty ratio that has been
maintained, and a variety of other formal and informal aspects of the life of the Law School. The
Iowa faculty also maintains a strong commitment to high quality scholarship and a dedication to
institutional and community service of various sorts.
There is no doubt that time and effort devoted to any one of these endeavors detracts from the
time and energy available for the other two. To some extent, productivity in one sphere always
comes at the expense of productivity in the others. It is nothing new that the optimum balance
among the three responsibilities of the faculty – both as a whole and individually – is debatable.
Perhaps the only point of agreement is that every member of the faculty is expected to and
should be active to some extent in all three areas. The preceding sections establish that the Iowa
faculty‟s behavior is consistent with this expectation.
In the last Self Study, it was noted that there were a variety of faculty views regarding whether
teaching or scholarship drained disproportionately large shares of the available faculty time.
Some argued for more effort devoted to teaching, while others maintained that heavy teaching
burdens damaged scholarly productivity. The report urged the faculty to consider whether the
entire faculty and individual members were striking appropriate balances between teaching and
scholarship. It noted how this “balance” concern was a relevant facet of many of the items that
were being highlighted in the Self Study for faculty attention. The report noted further that our
“historic and ongoing commitment to participation in the governance process,” coupled with the
133
increase in faculty size, had rendered the governance structure unmanageable, and that attention
ought to be given to reorganizing the committee structure, streamlining the governance process,
and reducing the amount of faculty members‟ time required by the governance process.
Shortly before the last Self Study, the University of Iowa adopted PTEAP “Post Tenure Effort
Allocation Policy” (PTEAP) applicable to all the units on campus. Under the terms of the policy,
the Law School was required to establish norms for the percentages of time and effort to be
devoted to teaching, scholarship, and service. In 1997, the faculty approved the following norms:
50-65% teaching; 30-45% research and scholarship; and 5-20% service. The ordinary
expectation is that most faculty will fall within these ranges on an annual basis. If any faculty
member in a particular year, for a particular period, anticipates that he or she will need to depart
from these effort allocation norms, he or she is to submit an individualized effort allocation
portfolio for approval by the Dean. This individualized portfolio is to specify the percentages of
time to be devoted by that faculty member to each of the three responsibilities of faculty. Unless
a faculty member seeks and obtains approval of such an individualized plan, he or she should fall
within the normal ranges.
The University PTEAP policy and the Law School norms responded to suggestions in the last
Self Study regarding identification of an appropriate balance of work loads. The Dean has used
the PTEAP system as one means of achieving flexibility in teaching obligations for faculty with
strong records of scholarship and planned projects that are deemed important.
Also since the last Self Study, the Law School has continued to reform its committee structure.
Consolidation and elimination of committees and functions has yielded a smaller number of
committees. The result is that faculty are generally expected to serve on fewer committees than
before. Whether this has resulted in an actual, marked reduction of governance burdens is
unclear, though there is a sense that there has been at least some diminution in committee
obligations for most faculty. Hopefully, the new structure will promote greater efficiency in
faculty governance.
While some greater flexibility in teaching assignments for some faculty, and modestly reduced
self-governance responsibilities, have been helpful in freeing more faculty for scholarship, the
fact remains that the imbalance between scholarship and other obligations, especially teaching, is
great enough that further steps are required.
Since the last Self Study and accreditation review in 1999-2000, and particularly over the last
three years, the faculty has given broad and systematic attention to its heavy teaching load and its
scholarly productivity. The review was occasioned by a number of factors: a felt sense that
scholarly activity is losing ground to the Law School‟s heavy teaching demands and its
commitment to self-governance; a concern that the school‟s traditional and supportive scholarly
community is weakening; signs that scholarly productivity is decreasing and, as importantly,
falling behind that of other schools with Iowa‟s scholarly reputation; increasing concerns about
the unequal distribution of support for faculty scholarship; and the loss of a large number of very
productive scholars to other law schools during recent years. (Anaya, Clinton, Blanck, Brinig,
Bibas, Saks, Green, Thomas).
134
A number of steps have been taken in response to these and other concerns about faculty
scholarship. An Associate Dean for Faculty Development (Adrien Wing) has been appointed
with a broad portfolio focused heavily on encouraging increased scholarship in the faculty. The
position is half-time. The faculty speakers‟ program has been greatly strengthened, particularly
by inviting many scholars from other law schools to make presentations to the faculty.
Committee and other self-governance commitments are being reduced. Efforts have been made
to encourage Iowa faculty to present their work in workshops for the full faculty. Formal and
informal mentoring of young scholars has been instituted. Summer research grants, leaves, and
effort reallocations (PTEAP) have been purposefully employed as incentives and rewards for
scholarship. These and other steps have surely had some effect, but they have also placed stress
on the fragile supportive scholarly community and ethic that Iowa has for years enjoyed.
There is ample evidence, moreover, to support the conclusion that these steps are not sufficient
to reinvigorate the faculty‟s commitment to scholarship. Over the past six years the faculty‟s
national reputation for scholarly quality has remained largely stable, at 19th by purely subjective
reputational measures. But the objective evidence of scholarly quality and productivity paints a
different picture. By 2005 the faculty‟s rank for overall per capita scholarly impact was between
33-38 [Leiter]. For the top quarter of the faculty, the scholarly impact rank is in the mid-to-high
20s. Iowa ranks 33rd in faculty citations in academic journals in law. SSRN activity (articles,
downloads) as of September 2006 ranked 36th for the prior twelve months, and the rate of
downloads per paper ranked 64th for the prior twelve months. This places Iowa as the 13th
ranked public law school, and 8th ranked law school in the Big Ten. For many years Iowa has
worked hard to remain one of the ten best public law schools in the nation, and one of the best
three or four in the Big Ten. While the recent and disappointing data about scholarly quality and
impact are, to be sure, rough measures and are not infallible, they do serve as indicators of
relative scholarly activity and impact among law schools. More importantly, they are well out of
line with the much higher, subjective ranking of faculty quality that we still appear to enjoy.
Data assembled for the Iowa faculty are consistent with the trends reported above. In the
categories of academic books and treatises, productivity rose sharply between 1998 and 2001,
but seems to have fallen off since. To a somewhat lesser extent, the same is true of academic
articles in law reviews and journals in other disciplines. Add to this the very recent losses of
some of the most highly productive faculty members (Brinig, Blanck, Bibas in 2005) and the risk
of further erosion in overall scholarship seems great. See Table 3-8 above.
Something more fundamental than too few faculty seminars or insufficient incentives or
excessive self-governance duties is at work. This is the conclusion the faculty has arrived at
after much discussion and study. The central problem, the faculty has concluded, is effort
distribution and, more specifically, the uniquely high demands that the Iowa Law School has for
many years placed on teaching. Iowa pioneered the first year small section/research and writing
course in the late 1960s. Faculty at Iowa took on the direct and sole responsibility of teaching
analytical skills and research skills through written work, edited by the faculty, rewritten by the
students, and if need be rewritten again. This was highly individualized teaching, and it
demanded great amounts of commitment and effort by the faculty. Today almost every law
school has adopted such a program, but until this year Iowa was one of very few (perhaps only
two) top law schools that continued to conduct the program directly through the faculty. The
135
substantial writing requirements in the upper level of the curriculum continue to be largely
supervised by the regular faculty. The normal course load for faculty at the Law School remains
at twelve hours, while course loads at virtually all other national law schools have been reduced
to nine or ten hours. The semester at Iowa is fourteen weeks, while the norm today, and the
accreditation standard, is thirteen weeks. Iowa requires significantly more credits for graduation
than the ABA minimum. As Iowa hires new faculty and emphasizes the importance of
scholarship, it offers them perhaps the most demanding teaching responsibility in the country –
certainly among the top-ranked schools.
In light of these facts and judgments, the faculty has undertaken four changes that will improve
the faculty‟s effort allocation among teaching, scholarship, and service. First, the time
commitment demanded for Law School and university service is being further reduced and
streamlined through a more efficient committee structure and increased administrative support.
Second, the small section writing program has been retained – hopefully even improved – but, as
of the 2006-07 academic year, the writing and research components are taught by legal writing
instructors who specialize in teaching writing and research, rather than regular (tenure track)
faculty members. Third, the ordinary teaching load may be reduced from four to three courses,
while at the same time the flexibility afforded by summer research support, research leaves, and
PTEAP effort reallocation will be retained as strong, added incentives. Higher teaching loads for
those faculty who choose not to publish regularly are being actively considered. Finally, serious
consideration is being given to the teaching schedule. Options include instituting fifty minute
classes, shortening the semester to thirteen weeks, and perhaps expanding the winter intercession
to a much longer four week semester. Whatever the details of changes finally agreed upon, the
result will be to place an increased demand on the faculty to produce scholarship, facilitated by a
reduced allocation of effort to teaching.
It is hoped that the effect on the quality of students‟ education at the Law School will be positive.
Five or six new faculty have been hired on a start-up basis to teach research and writing in the
first year, and their specialization as legal writing instructors will likely improve the resulting
skills our students learn. With the addition of the legal writing instructors, the total teaching
resources at the Law School will, it appears, only modestly decrease even after the faculty‟s
teaching load is adjusted downward to three courses. The richness of the curriculum at Iowa will
therefore be preserved, and the emphasis on learning through writing will be maintained. And
with renewed emphasis on scholarly work, combined with the efforts of the new Associate Dean
for Faculty Development, the wide availability of research assistant positions for students, and
the large number of seminars and tutorials in the curriculum, the likelihood of growing student
involvement in demanding and important research conducted by faculty should increase
considerably. All of this should help to continue Iowa‟s longstanding and even unique
commitment to a highly demanding, writing-based, program of legal education.
H. Promotion, Tenure and Clinical Career Status
The Iowa Law School‟s tenure and promotion standards can be found in Appendix 3-5. The
criteria for evaluating clinicians for the equivalent status are set forth in Appendix 3-6.
136
1. Annual Review
University policy requires an annual written performance review for all untenured faculty
members. At the Law School, the Dean prepares this review each year in consultation with the
reviewed faculty member.
During a law faculty member‟s first year of service, the Dean, in consultation with the faculty
member, appoints a senior faculty member to serve as a “mentor” to the untenured faculty
member. The mentor is available to the untenured faculty member to provide him or her with
advice concerning teaching, research, and service. Under Law School practices, the mentor is
disqualified from later serving on the untenured faculty member‟s tenure committee and
ordinarily does not review the candidate‟s scholarship in the tenure process.
In 1996, the law faculty adopted a policy for peer review of untenured faculty members‟
teaching. In its initial incarnation, review was conducted solely at the discretion of the untenured
faculty member and was intended primarily as a means for providing support to assist the faculty
member. As amended in 1998, the peer review is mandatory, occurring each year for all tenuretrack faculty, beginning in the second year of teaching, and is intended not only to provide
constructive support for the faculty member, but also to supply evaluative information to the
faculty members‟ tenure committee.
Review under the policy is carried out by three tenured faculty members, two appointed by the
Dean, a third appointed by the faculty member being reviewed. Review entails observation of at
least one class (live or via videotape, at the discretion of the faculty member being reviewed) as
well as assessment of the faculty member‟s feedback on student writing, to the extent applicable.
The reviewers must discuss the content of the review with the faculty member. The review has
proved useful to the faculty members and to the Dean, and has occasioned thorough and
constructive conversations by the Dean with untenured faculty members.
2. Promotion and Tenure
Under the Law School‟s promotion and tenure guidelines, a candidate will now be evaluated for
tenure during the fifth year of appointment, although earlier or later decisions are possible.
Evaluation in the fifth year applies to faculty members who began full-time service at the Law
School starting in the 1999-2000 school year. The previous practice provided for evaluation of
candidates during their fourth year of service.
The tenure process at the Law School is two-staged. During the first year of a tenure-track
faculty member‟s service, the Dean appoints an ad hoc tenure committee for each candidate.
The committee is expected, to the extent practicable, to serve throughout the course of the
candidate‟s pre-tenure work.
In a candidate‟s third year, the tenure committee appointed for a candidate compiles a thorough
report on the teaching, research, and service activities of the candidate. The committee makes a
judgment about the candidate‟s progress based on this information, and forwards its report to the
Dean. The Dean presents the report to the tenured faculty, and after discussion in a faculty
137
meeting a retention vote is taken. On the basis of the faculty vote and discussion, the Dean then
consults in detail with the candidate about progress toward tenure and new or different efforts
that the candidate should focus on in the final years before the tenure decision is made. The
report and the Dean‟s recommendation is thereafter forwarded to the Provost.
In the tenuring process, primary consideration is given to teaching and scholarship, and
secondary consideration is given to service. Ordinarily the tenure committee will begin its work
in the spring of the academic year before a tenure decision is to be made. The tenure committee
assists the candidate in compiling the tenure dossier and prepares a report which is to include a
summary and evaluation of the facts compiled, but shall not include recommendations on the
ultimate question of advancement. The tenure dossier and committee report is circulated to the
faculty, and the faculty meets for a formal discussion with regard to each candidate. No votes are
taken at this meeting on whether tenure/promotion should be granted or denied. Following the
formal meeting, the Dean surveys the tenured faculty for a specific recommendation regarding
grant or denial of tenure, along with written comments. The Dean then prepares a written
recommendation on the grant or denial of tenure and submits it to the University Provost‟s
Office. Separately, a promotion recommendation is made. Law School practice ordinarily is to
promote from associate to full professor.
During the 1999-2006 Self Study period, eight faculty members who began their teaching careers
at Iowa were granted tenure. All were tenured within the ordinary five-year period. No persons
were denied tenure. No faculty members left Iowa before any tenure decision. One untenured
faculty member resigned effective the fall of 2006 prior to the third-year review.
3. Clinical Faculty Status
At the beginning of the Self Study period, clinical faculty in the Law School were provided job
security under the umbrella of Professional & Scientific Employees with career status. The
University has recently developed a status of Clinical Faculty, who serve in various teaching and
research capacities throughout the University‟s colleges. The faculty of the legal clinic have
recently elected to move into this new clinical faculty status. The differences in job description
and job security between the former Career Status and Clinical Faculty status (with job security)
are small, and all appear to operate to the advantage of the clinic‟s faculty, who sought the
change.
The criteria to govern the decision whether to grant Clinical Faculty status to persons holding a
clinical appointment at the Law School‟s legal clinic (see Appendix 3-6) were designed to
parallel the promotion and tenure policies for tenure-track faculty members insofar as
appropriate. The law faculty has not adopted separate procedural provisions to govern Clinical
Faculty career status decisions, but has historically used procedures substantially similar to those
used in making tenure and promotion decisions for tenure-track faculty. Clinical Faculty are also
included with all faculty in the Law School‟s peer review process.
Although the clinical faculty and LAWR faculty are not eligible for tenure, their academic
freedom is protected through a number of University policies. Clinical and LAWR faculty are
covered by the University‟s “Faculty Dispute Procedures” (University Operations Manual
138
section III.29.2(e)), which give them the right to contest violations of their academic freedom.
Id. III.29.6(a)(2)(d). A variety of specific University policies applicable to all faculty (e.g., antidiscrimination, anti-retaliation) would provide protection in relevant cases. Id. Part II, chs. 1-14.
Finally, a specific provision of the Operations Manual (Section III.10.9(h)(i)(a)) states:
Termination of salaried clinical faculty during the term of the appointment must be for
failure to meet written standards of competence and performance established by the unit
and the University.
By implication, termination for other reasons would not be permitted. We are not aware of a
similar provision applicable to the LAWR faculty, but believe that similar protection would be
available as a matter of contract law.
4. Peer Review
The Law School‟s peer review policy seeks to provide periodic review of tenured members of
the faculty and Clinical Faculty members to assure their continued vitality. See Appendix 3-7.
The policy contemplates peer review of such faculty members at least once every seven years. In
the 2006-07 school year, five faculty members are scheduled for the peer review process.
At some point the Law School may need to address the manner of administering peer review.
With well over forty tenured faculty members, and a requirement that peer review occur once
every seven years per faculty member, the Law School would need to peer review an average of
about six faculty members each year. This has not yet proved administratively feasible. Three or
four reviews have been done per year over the Self Study period (starting with the most senior
faculty), but the entire tenured faculty has not yet been reviewed. It may be advisable for the
Law School to reconsider its peer review practices to determine how the administrative burden of
peer review might be minimized while retaining meaningful peer review within the ambit of
University policy.
I. Faculty Support
1. Administrative and Secretarial Support
Secretarial Support. There are 11.5 FTE secretaries on the fourth floor, and two full-time
secretaries on the third floor. The faculty/secretary ratio is under four faculty for each secretary.
This number, however, may be misleading for a variety of reasons. First, it combines clinical
and non-clinical faculty even though secretarial needs in these two settings may be quite
different. Second, the overall ratio given above does not account for adjuncts, emeritus faculty,
and visitors. While the need for secretarial support varies considerably among these individuals,
the fact remains that faculty secretaries do undertake this additional responsibility for support.
Similarly, faculty secretaries are assigned to the Writing Center as well as the office of the
academic achievement director. Taking into account all of these additional assignments, the
actual overall ratio of faculty to secretaries as of the 2006-07 school year is much closer to four
faculty members per secretary.
139
Management Information Systems and Video Support. The Law School has five full-time
computer support staff members: Kirk Corey (Management Information Systems Director);
Apryl Betts (networks); Robert L. Ramsey (Web Master/Support Technician); Jeremy Kupka
(desktop support); and one full-time video support staff, Patty Ankrum.
2. Financial Support
Over the Self Study period, the Law School administration has established an office budget for
faculty members, generally providing certain travel support and a limited amount of funds for
their uses. The following information, which pertains to the office budget for the 2005-06 school
year, is representative of office budgets for the past several years.
Travel allowance. Due to the high cost of air travel from the Iowa City area, Iowa law faculty
members are likely to incur higher travel expenses than those incurred by their academic
colleagues in major metropolitan areas. There is not a standard dollar amount available to each
faculty member for travel. Each year, the Dean authorizes each faculty member to use, for
approved academic travel, an amount equal to that required for transportation to the forthcoming
AALS Annual Meeting, assuming the trip extends over a Saturday night. For the 2005-06
academic year that amount was $1,300. The Dean makes available, on a discretionary basis,
additional amounts needed for approved academic travel. “Approved academic travel” means, in
addition to the AALS meeting, other conferences, or travel necessary to conduct research or to
present a research paper to a scholarly assembly. This amount can now include international
travel, an area that was inadequately funded from Law School sources in the past.
Summer Research Stipends. Traditionally, the Law School has provided financial support for
major research activities that are ongoing during the summertime. By traditional practice, pretenure faculty members are awarded summer research support from a variety of funding sources
for each pre-tenure summer.
Tenured faculty members are invited to submit proposals for summer research stipends. Specific
projects are to be proposed and progress after the summer leave is reported to the Dean.
Unfortunately, funds are sometimes inadequate to support all proposed projects. This inevitably
means that some worthy proposals are delayed or not pursued at all. Obviously this is not ideal
for a faculty wishing to build upon its reputation for academic distinction.
Research Assistants. The Law School provides very substantial research assistant support for
faculty working on scholarship or other Law School related matters. The policy for awarding
faculty research assistant support (1/4 time) is that a faculty member must have a project or other
reason for the RA need, whether for one or two or three or even more RAs. Virtually all well
justified requests are granted, as the Law School has a large number of students who wish or
need (in connection with nonresidency or scholarships) to work, and being a faculty member‟s
RA is the preferred opportunity for most students.
Other direct financial support. The Law School pays for reasonable duplication, long-distance
telephone, and fast mail charges. It pays for group ABA membership and section dues, and
140
expenses associated with membership in the Iowa Bar, the Iowa State Bar Association and its
sections, and local professional groups.
The Dean allocates $300 for other work-related, professional expenses such as inactive out-ofstate bar memberships and membership dues for learned societies, scholarly books and journals
not available in our Law Library, software for computers owned by the Law School, and minor
office equipment items excluding computer hardware and upgrades.
3. Developmental Leaves; Faculty Scholars Program; PTEAP
The Law School has some discretion in the grant of developmental leaves to faculty, limited by
University-wide policies. During the Self Study period, the award of leaves proceeded in
accordance with traditional practices. Those traditional practices are essentially two. First,
tenure-track associate professors are generally awarded a one-semester leave prior to (or in some
cases, during) their tenure year to facilitate the completion of scholarship. Eight faculty
members were eligible for, and received, such leaves during the Self Study period.
Second, under current University policy, tenured faculty members are eligible to apply for a onesemester developmental leave after five years (ten full semesters) of full-time teaching service at
Iowa. Approximately twenty-six such semester leaves were taken by law faculty members over
the Self Study period. The actual availability of such leaves is also dependent upon funding
levels and curricular needs. In view of these pressures, it appears that developmental leaves were
not uniformly available to tenured faculty in the first semester of eligibility for such awards.
While this means that the average time between developmental leaves may have slightly
exceeded five years for faculty applying for leaves during the Self Study period, this appears to
be a matter of modest concern rather than a matter of crisis.
In addition to these longstanding scholarship and developmental leave programs, the
University‟s PTEAP has allowed the Law School to reallocate discrete portions of faculty
members‟ efforts toward scholarship in recognition of scholarly productivity and the submission
of an acceptable plan for a future semester or year.
Other University-wide programs designed to provide special research support were available to
some law faculty members during the Self Study period. For example, the University‟s Faculty
Scholar Award program provides for three semester leaves over a three-year period for the
pursuit of cutting-edge research. Awards are extremely competitive and designed to support truly
unique and extraordinary research.
J. Intellectual Enrichment Programs
The Law School is fortunate to have several ongoing intellectual enrichment programs that have
brought an array of distinguished practitioners, jurists, academics, and government officials to
Iowa City. Many of these programs are made possible as a result of the generous support of the
Iowa Law School Foundation, the University of Iowa Ida Beam Lectureship program, and
through generous contributions from other friends of the Law School. The Dean budgets
annually for faculty seminars presented by scholars outside our own Law School faculty. In
141
addition, our endowed lectures each have amounts available to support the speakers associated
with them.
In general, these programs are open to all members of the Law School community, and, for that
matter, to the greater university community. In a few cases, the programs are designed as law
faculty presentations or in conjunction with law classes.
Continued support of these programs is vital to the Law School‟s effort to maintain its reputation
as a nationally prominent institution. Indeed, as compared to its peer institutions located in or
near major metropolitan areas, it is particularly imperative that the Iowa Law School continue
(and possibly expand) efforts to ensure that leaders in the legal community, such as those listed
below, continue to appear regularly at Law School events.
1. Judges and Practitioners in Residence
The Law School has long enjoyed a tradition of bringing prominent jurists and practitioners to
the Law School for brief periods to teach intersession courses, to lecture for short segments of
semester-long courses, and to deliver presentations to students and faculty. A list of those who
have served in this capacity during the Self Study period includes:
Justice (ret‟d) Linda Neuman
Sir Geoffrey Palmer, New Zealand
Judge George Stigler
C.J. Williams, Asst US Atty
Justice Randy Holland, Del.
Judge John Jarvy
Hon. Mark Bennett, USDC, ND Ia.
2. Special Lectures
The following individuals delivered lectures in connection with a variety of special Law School
programs. While the list is representative of the breadth and richness of the lecture offerings at
the Law School, it is by no means comprehensive. For example, student organizations (including
student-edited journals) and individual faculty members have invited a large number of
additional speakers to present addresses on a huge variety of topics.
The major funded/endowed lectures at the Law School are the Levitt, Tamisiea, Murray, Smith,
and Webster Lectures. The newest lecture is the James Fraser Smith lecture for Trial Advocacy.
The primary endowed lecture each year is the Levitt Lecture, which brings a speaker of true
national and international reputation to the Law School and attracts a very large audience of Law
School and University faculty, staff, and students, as well as alumni and other leaders through
the public and private sectors in the State of Iowa.
142
For the inaugural Levitt Lecture (in January 1997), the Law School hosted a two-day symposium
on the impact of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes‟ essay, “The Path of the Law.” A dozen
prominent scholars and commentators were featured.
The second Levitt Lecture was held in April, 1998, in celebration of the 50th anniversary of the
creation of the State of Israel. Abba Eban, former Israeli Ambassador to the U.N. and the U.S.,
was the featured speaker.
The third Levitt Lecture was held in October, 1999. Judge John Ferren of the District of
Columbia Court of Appeals delivered a Levitt Lecture commemorating former Supreme Court
Justice (and former Iowa law dean) Wiley Rutledge. United States Supreme Court Justice John
Paul Stevens, who clerked for Justice Rutledge, provided remarks.
The lectures presented during the Self Study period are listed below:
143
TABLE 3-9 NAMED AND ENDOWED LECTURES 2000-06
YEAR
LEVITT
2000
John Hume
(April)
2001
Janet Reno
(Fall)
2002
David
Halberstam
(April); Tom
Friedman
(September)
Wesley Clark
(September)
2003
2004
Mary Robinson
(April)
2005
Irshad Manji
(April)
2006
Linda
Greenhouse
(Fall)
TAMISIEA
MURRAY
WEBSTER
John Price
(April)
Edward J.
McCaffery
(February);
Robert C. Post
(November)
Howell Jackson
(September)
Charles
Ogletree
(October)
3. Workshops
The workshop program is designed to provide a forum for leading academics, including Iowa
law faculty members, to discuss scholarly works in progress in a congenial setting. Generally,
presenters appear by invitation of the Speakers Committee and deliver a luncheon presentation to
the law faculty. Speakers have often generously made time available outside of their
presentations for discussions with individual faculty, lectures to classes or other student groups,
and presentations outside of the Law School. Speakers for the period 2004-06 can be found in
Appendix 3-7. An added benefit is that most of these speakers count for CLE credit for faculty.
A listing of workshop presenters scheduled for the current academic year illustrates the
intellectual breadth of the program:
144
TABLE 3-10 FACULTY SEMINARS 2006-07
Sept. 7 and 8,
2006
Internal Presentations (multiple faculty
giving presentations)
Sept. 13, 2006
Ms. Sigma Huda
U.N. Special Rapporteur on Trafficking in
Humans
Sept. 14, 2006
Linda Greenhouse
2006 Levitt Lecturer
Informal lunch with faculty
Sept. 15, 2006
Professor Robert Chesney
Wake Forest University School of Law
Sept. 28, 2006
Internal presentations (multiple faculty
giving presentations)
Oct. 5, 2006
Professor Robert Hockett
Cornell University Law School
Oct. 12, 2006
Professor David Baldus
University of Iowa College of Law
Oct. 13, 2006
Professor Catherine Sharkey
Columbia University School of Law
Oct. 20, 2006
Professor Ahmed Taha
Wake Forest University School of Law
145
Oct. 26, 2006
Dr. Susan Phillips
Consultant in Psychometrics & Assessment
Law
Oct. 27, 2006
Professor Jim Rossi
Florida State University
Nov. 2, 2006
Professor Randall Bezanson
Nov. 3, 2006
Professor Geoff McLay
Victoria University of Wellington
Nov. 9, 2006
Professor Christina Bohannan
Nov. 10, 2006
Professor Paul Dubinsky
Wayne State University Law School
Feb. 9, 2007
Professor Frank Cooper
Suffolk Law School
Feb. 16, 2007
Feb. 23, 2007
Professor Kerry Abrams
University of Virginia School of Law
Co-Director, Center for Children, Families
and the Law
External Engagement Panel
146
March 2, 2007
Professor Reginald Oh
Texas Wesleyan University School of Law
March 19-21,
2007
James Sheehan
Practitioner-in-Residence
March 23, 2007
Professor Emily Houh
University of Cincinnati College of Law
March 30, 2007
Professor Elizabeth Weeks
University of Kansas School of Law
April 6, 2007
April 12, 2007
Professor Sanford Levinson
University of Texas at Austin
School of Law
Professor Jessica Silbey
Suffolk Law School
4. Visiting Faculty, Adjunct Faculty, and Joint Appointments
The life of the Law School was enriched by a number of visiting academics over the 1999-2006
time period. Visiting faculty generally have remained in residence for either a semester or a full
academic year, teaching courses and providing other opportunities for scholarly interaction.
Special endowed visitorships (the Mason Ladd visitorship and the Daniels visitorship) have been
created to bring especially distinguished visitors to the Law School. The Law School has also
been served by a number of adjunct faculty members who are prominent practitioners, jurists, or
lawyers who work in various capacities at the University.
Visitors and adjuncts are recommended for appointment by the Faculty Appointments
Committee. The full faculty has the opportunity for review and approval of the
recommendations, and the Dean subsequently secures the actual appointment. Once a visitor or
adjunct has been approved for the teaching of a particular course via this process, the visitor or
147
adjunct may be assigned to teach that course again in future semesters without undergoing the
formal recommendation and faculty review process again, assuming that class evaluations are
acceptable.
Additionally, faculty from other university colleges who hold “zero-time” joint appointments at
the Law School. Joint appointment holders are particularly important to the Law School‟s effort
to create interdisciplinary connections across the UI campus. Currently, eight Iowa faculty hold
zero-time joint appointments at the Law School.
The Law School has been fortunate to draw upon a large number of adjuncts, visitors, and joint
appointment holders both to offer specialized courses and to provide support for the teaching of
some core courses, such as trial advocacy. In addition, many such faculty take on other
responsibilities, such as the supervision of independent research, supervision of students in an
externship or practicum, and the creation of various tutorial classes. The table below gives a
representative indication by listing all of the curricular responsibilities for all visitors, adjuncts,
or joint appointment holders for the 2005-06 academic year.
148
TABLE 3-11 TEACHING BY VISITORS AND ADJUNCTS 2005-06
FALL 2005 ADJUNCTS
Professor:
Course(s) Taught:
Berry, Sean (Adj)
Federal Criminal Practice
Buzuvis, Erin (Adj)
Constitutional Law I
Collins, Tom (Adj)
Law & Accounting
Domrin, Alexander (Visiting
Contemporary Russian Law in
Fac)
Historical Context; Foreign
Relations
Ives, Andrew (Adj)
Legal Issues in Intercollegiate
Athletics (year-long seminar)
Johnson, Nicholas
Law of Electronic Media
Koontz, Richard
Non-profit Organizational
Effectiveness; Non-profit &
Philanthropic Organizations
Legomsky, Stephen (Visiting
Immigration Law
Fac)
Liebig, Chris (Adj)
Contracts & Sales I
MacQueen, John
Mills, Marc (Adj)
Neuman, Linda (Adj)
Professional Responsibility
Pelzer, Gay (Adj)
(year-long seminar)
Palmer, Geoffrey (Adj)
Comparative Constitutional
Law (started during August
intersession)
Pitton, Michael J. (Adj)
Arbitration
Rhodes, Ann (Adj)
Schantz, Mark
Appellate Advocacy I
Williams, Charles (Adj)
Federal Criminal Practice
SPRING 2006 ADJUNCTS
Professor:
Course(s) Taught:
Buzuvis, Erin (Visiting
Faculty)
Hansing, Mark (Adj)
Patent Prosecution
Hodgson, Robert (Adj)
Patent Prosecution
Hughes, Emily (Adj)
Client Counseling I; Criminal
Procedure: Investigation;
Criminal Procedure:
Adjudication
149
Ives, Andrew (Adj)
Johnson, Nicholas
Kelly, Jane (Adj)
Kerber, Linda (Adj)
Koontz, Richard
Mills, Marc (Adj)
Morf, Paul (Adj)
Pelzer, Gay (Adj)
Rhodes, Ann (Adj)
Rossi, Chris (Adj)
Schantz, Mark
Sparks, Karol (Adj)
Stier, Serena (Adj)
Trimpe, Pamela (Adj)
Criminal Procedure:
Investigation
Gender & Sexuality in U.S.
Law
Non-profit Organizational
Effectiveness II; Cultural
Property
Trusts and Estates
(year-long seminar)
Problems of International Law
Commercial Transactions;
Commercial Contract Drafting
Art, Law & Ethics
Art, Law & Ethics
A comprehensive chart extending back to the beginning of the Self Study period would, quite
obviously, extend for several additional pages and would only further emphasize the rich variety
of course offerings made possible by the use of distinguished visitors, adjuncts, and joint
appointment holders.
K. Faculty Fellows Program
For much of the Self Study period, the Law School has not operated its Faculty Fellows
Program. The program was designed in response to persistent difficulties encountered by
members of various underrepresented groups seeking to enter academia as tenure-track law
faculty members. Faculty fellows were appointed for either one or two years, during which they
were provided with office space at the Law School and access to the resources generally
available to full-time faculty members. It was contemplated that faculty fellows would spend the
majority of their time conducting research projects, with a modest amount of time directed
towards teaching, as the faculty fellow desired. The faculty fellow could then draw upon his or
her work and experience to demonstrate scholarly promise to others in the legal academy.
Faculty fellows have included:
Harold O.M. Rocha (2001-2003)(Universidad Autonoma de Madrid)
Laura Beny (1999-2000)(now teaching at U Michigan Law School)
150
Creola Johnson (1997-99)(now tenured at Ohio
State University)
Devon Carbado (1995-97)(now tenured and Associate Dean at UCLA)
Sumi Cho (1994-95)(now tenured at DePaul University)
Cynthia Nance (1993-94) (now Dean at Arkansas-Fayetteville)
Angela Gilmore (1990-92)(now tenured at Nova Southeastern).
It goes without saying, given the accomplishments of most of the Fellows Iowa has enjoyed, that
the program was very successful. But budget reductions over the past six years have made it
impossible to continue it. It is hoped that the program can be re-established again when
resources permit.
L. Governance
The Law School‟s tradition of collegial governance extends back for many years. This general
approach to faculty governance, in which decisions are first debated at the faculty committee
level and then referred to the full faculty for discussion and vote (usually at a faculty meeting),
has continued over the Self Study period. On average, the law faculty held one full faculty
meeting per month during the Self Study period.
This form of governance, of course, can be unwieldy, particularly as the size of the faculty
continues to increase. These concerns were expressed in the last Self Study report, and the
faculty has adopted certain modest changes in response. Two changes in particular merit
discussion. First, the faculty adopted a “lay on the table” procedure whereby committee
recommendations are deemed approved by the plenary faculty without full formal faculty
discussion unless objection is raised by at least one faculty member. Some decisions (e.g., certain
hiring decisions) cannot proceed by the “lay on the table” procedure. Limited experience with
the procedure has suggested so far that it has worked adequately to streamline decision making
without disenfranchising interested faculty.
Second, the committee structure at the Law School has been reconfigured. Whereas the last Self
Study report counted twenty-five active committees for the 1992-93 school year, the Law School
had twelve committees for the 1999-2000 school year. Further change in the committee
structure is taking place with the goal of reducing and faculty time commitment yet maintaining
healthy self-governance. Faculty members presently are asked to serve on two-three committees,
although ad hoc committees and other administrative assignments are also typically part of the
workload of the tenured faculty. The committees for 2006-07 (including the limited-term Self
Study Committee), are as follows.
Law School Committees 2006-07
Academic Standards and Review Committee
Admissions Committee
Curriculum Committee
Diversity Committee
Faculty Appointments Committee
151
Internal Procedures and Long Range Planning Committee
Post-Tenure Peer Review Committee
Physical Facilities and Information Technology Committee
Self Study Committee
Speakers and Professional Development Committee
Student Honors and Awards Committee
Student Services Committee
The Diversity Committee was newly established in 2006. It is a faculty and student committee
whose charge is to address issues affecting the Law School community, including diversity of
the faculty and student body and classroom climate.
Committee workload varies substantially. The appointments and admissions committees are
generally perceived as bearing especially heavy workloads. However, it does not appear that
eliminating committees through the streamlining process caused the workloads of any of the
remaining committees to increase appreciably. Accordingly, the streamlining in this regard may
be judged as a success. Indeed, it might counsel in favor of further assessment of the committee
structure.
On the other hand, despite a larger number of faculty members and a smaller number of
committees, it is doubtful whether there is any widely-held perception among individual faculty
members that their own committee responsibilities have diminished. On the whole, it seems that
the change to the committee structure has had a general soothing effect, and that calls for
immediate change to the faculty governance structure have temporarily subsided.
Many law faculty also serve in University-wide governance as indicated under Section F of this
chapter.
152
CHAPTER FOUR: STUDENT LIFE
A. Admissions
1. Introduction
The primary mission of the Admissions Staff is to recruit, admit and then advise a class of
students with the strongest possible credentials as measured by numerical indicators, diversity of
experience and views, potential for leadership, and commitment to the study of law. It is also
important to maintain an appropriate ratio of resident to non-resident students. While this
mission is unchanged since the last Self Study, the environment is very different. At the time of
the last Self Study, the applicant pool had dropped from 2134 in 1992 to 1110 in 1998. Today,
the applicant pool has risen from 1339 in 2005 to 1809 in 2006.
2. Applicant Pools and Enrolled Classes (2004, 2005, 2006)
Using the class that matriculated in 2006 (including both summer and fall entrants) as a model
for the current admissions environment, there were 210 students, of which 103 were residents
and 107 non-residents, for a division of 49%/51%; ninety-five were women, for a percentage of
45%; forty-five were students of color, for a percentage of 21%. The students came from thirtyfive different states and four foreign countries, and they attended ninety-six different
undergraduate institutions. The median LSAT was 161; the median GPA was 3.62. The class
was selected from a pool of 1809 applicants, of which 401 were residents and 1408 nonresidents, for a division of 22%/78%; 693 were women, for a percentage of 38%; and 366
identified themselves as minority, for a percentage of 20%.
The Law School bucked the national trends in 2006. While the national applicant pool was
down 6.6% compared to the prior year, the College of Law‟s applicant pool rose by 35.1%
compared to the prior year. We attribute the increase in our applicant pool to the recruiting
efforts of our new Assistant Dean of Admissions, Collins Byrd, and his temporary Admissions
Recruiter, Katie Auerbach, both of whom were hired in the Summer of 2005. All of the growth
in the applicant pool of 2006 came from non-residents; there was a slight decrease in the
resident pool.
Table 4-1 and Table 4-3 below provide a demographic breakdown of the applicant pool and of
the enrolled class in each of the last three academic seasons. The source of the information in
these tables is the annual letter from the Admissions Office to the Dean (Attachment 4-4) and
the Annual ABA Questionnaire.
With its long tradition of concern for diversity, the Law School is obviously concerned about the
drop in African American numbers indicated in the tables below. Since the College has usually
been able to enroll only a slightly smaller percentage of African Americans than the percentage
they constitute within the applicant pool, the key to ensuring an adequate percentage of African
Americans lies in increasing the number of applications from this group. Table 4-2 indicates that
African Americans constituted 10.4% of the national applicant pool in 2005. Table 4-1 shows
that African Americans constituted 5% of the Law School‟s applicant pool in 2005 and in 2006,
and Table 4-3 indicates that African Americans constituted 4% of the Law School‟s enrolled
153
class in 2005 and in 2006. Perhaps the decline in applications from African Americans simply
reflects the number of years during which the Law School did not have a professional (nonfaculty) director of admissions and was thus somewhat hampered in its recruitment efforts. The
hiring of the new Assistant Dean of Admissions in the summer of 2005 appears to have halted
the decline in the percentage of African American applications. It may take several years of
recruiting efforts before the College sees any substantial increase. The faculty will have to
continue to monitor this issue.
TABLE 4-1 APPLICANT POOLS OF 1992, 1998, 2004, 2005, 2006
1992
1998
2004
2005
2006
Applications
2134
1110
1601
1339
1809
Median LSAT
155
155
157
157
158
Median GPA
3.20
3.31
3.46
3.51
3.48
Residents
668 (31%)*
426 (38%)* 473 (30%)*
417 (31%)*
401 (22%)*
Nonresidents
1466 (69%)
684 (62%)
1128 (70%)
922 (69%)
1408 (78%)
Women
814 (38%)
444 (40%)
632 (39%)
551 (41%)
693 (38%)
Men
1320 (62%)
666 (60%)
969 (61%)
788 (59%)
1116 (62%)
Total
Minorities
580 (27%)
257 (23%)
279 (17%)
240 (18%)
366 (20%)
African Am.
353 (17%)
113 (10%)
91 (6%)
70 (5%)
93 (5%)
Asian Am.
113 (5%)
64 (6%)
110 (7%)
102 (8%)
154 (9%)
Latino/a
97 (5%)
47 (4%)
70 (4%)
55 (4%)
104 (6%)
Native Am.
17 (1%)
33 (3%)
8 (1%)
13 (1%)
15 (1%)
Foreign
29 (3%)
64 (4%)
46 (3%)
70 (4%)
* All figures in parentheses are percentages of the total applicant pool.
154
TABLE 4-2 NATIONAL APPLICANT POOL OF 2005
Applications
95,760
Mean LSAT
152.7
Mean GPA
3.23
Women
46,053 (48.1%)
Men
48,637 (50.8%)
Total Minorities 26,577 (27.8%)
African Am.
10,006 (10.4%)
Asian Am.
7,943 (8.3%)
Latino/a
7,872 (8.2%)
Native Am.
756 (0.8%)
155
TABLE 4-3 UI COLLEGE OF LAW ENROLLED CLASSES OF 1992, 1998, 2004, 2005,
2006
Applications
1992
2134
1998
1110
2004
1601
2005
1339
2006
1809
Offers (% of Apps)
457 (21%)
522 (47%)
437 (27%)
519 (39%)
602 (33%)
Enrolled (% of Offers)
233 (51%)
229 (44%)
248 (57%)
225 (43%)
210 (35%)
Median LSAT
160
159
160
161
161
Mean LSAT
159
158
159
160
160
75% LSAT
162
163
163
163
25% LSAT
155
156
158
158
Median GPA
3.49
3.48
3.57
3.59
3.62
Mean GPA
3.42
3.39
3.54
3.57
3.62
75% GPA
3.71
3.82
3.77
3.83
25% GPA
3.12
3.32
3.39
3.40
Residents (% of Enroll)
152 (65%)
137 (60%)
157 (63%)
121 (54%)
103 (49%)
Nonresidents (% of Enroll)
81 (35%)
92 (40%)
91 (37%)
104 (46%)
107 (51%)
Women (% of Enroll)
101 (43%)
87 (38%)
116 (47%)
105 (47%)
95 (45%)
Men (% of Enroll)
132 (57%)
142 (62%)
132 (53%)
120 (53%)
115 (55%)
Total Minorities
(% of Enroll)
55 (24%)
38 (17%)
39 (16%)
36 (16%)
45 (21%)
African Am.
(% of Enroll)
23 (10%)
15 (7%)
12 (5%)
8 (4%)
8 (4%)
Asian Am.
(% of Enroll)
15 (6%)
10 (4%)
13 (5%)
18 (8%)
23 (11%)
Latino/a
(% of Enroll)
12 (5%)
8 (3%)
12 (5%)
9 (4%)
12 (6%)
Native Am.
(% of Enroll)
5 (2%)
5 (2%)
2 (1%)
1 (1%)
2 (1%)
Foreign Students
8 (3%)
4 (2%)
1 (1%)
4 (2%)
# of States
30
34
32
35
# of Undergrad Institutions
104
98
99
96
156
3. Admissions and Financial Aid Staff
At the time of the 1992-93 Self Study, James Thomas was the Director of Admissions and
Financial Aid, and he was responsible for overseeing both the admissions operation and financial
aid. He was assisted by one professional level administrator and one full-time merit staff. In
1993, he left to become the admissions director at another school, and a decision was made to
reconfigure the staff at that time, including hiring a professional level person who would be
primarily responsible for financial aid. Rather than conduct two searches for a director and
associate director simultaneously, the associate director was hired first. In 1993, Susan Palmer,
who was previously in the University‟s Financial Aid office, joined the Law School, and for two
years, the Admissions Committee Chair acted as Associate Dean for Admissions. In 1995,
following a national search for an experienced admissions professional, Camille DeJorna started
as the Admissions Director and Susan Palmer became the Director of Financial Aid. When
Camille DeJorna left in 2001, Susan Palmer stepped in as the Acting Director of Admissions in
2001-02, and then the Law School hired Amy Liu as the Associate Director of Admissions
(2002-05), and once again the Admissions Committee Chair (Patricia Cain in 2001-03 and
Marcella David in 2003-05) acted as the Associate Dean for Admissions. Finally, in 2005, the
Law School hired Collins Byrd as the Assistant Dean of Admissions.
The present Admissions and Financial Aid Staff serves many important functions. The obvious
ones are the recruitment of applicants, the organization and evaluation of files, the presentation
of programming, such as the Bridge-the-Gap minority program and Admitted Students Day, and
the administration of the Law School‟s financial aid program. Since the time of the last Self
Study, the staff has enhanced the Law School‟s outreach to applicants by improving the content
and the quality of our collegiate web page; by revising our view book; and by making it possible:
1) to apply for both admission and financial aid online; and 2) to check financial aid status
online. But the staff does other things as well: arranging for and conducting tours of the building
for prospective students and their parents; helping students who have been admitted find
housing, child-care, and other resources; providing academic and personal counseling; providing
credit counseling and debt management counseling; producing literature used in the admissions
and financial aid process; selecting new technology and overseeing its use.
The size of the permanent, full-time staff increased from three in 1992-93, to about 4.25 in 19992000, to six in 2005-06. The full-time members of the staff who report to the Assistant Dean of
Admissions, Collins Byrd, are: Jan Barnes, Admissions Coordinator; Melissa Plummer,
Admissions Assistant; and Karen Sojka, Admissions Assistant. Susan Palmer, Director of
Financial Aid, reports to the Associate Dean of Student Affairs, Linda McGuire, and Jessica
Diers, Secretary III, reports to Susan Palmer. Because competition for the best students has
become more intense, recruitment of applicants and increasing the yield of those to whom an
offer is made have both become more important, and more time consuming. In 2005, in order to
meet this challenge, the Law School created a new temporary position: Admissions Recruiter.
The position was filled by Katie Auerbach in the Summer of 2005. However, she left in the
Spring of 2006. To replace her, the institution now has created a new position, the Assistant
Director of Admissions, and a search is underway. It is essential that we fill this position as soon
157
as possible. It is also important that we provide additional work-study student support to the
Director of Financial Aid in the spring semester of each academic year.
4. Admissions Process
a. Admissions Criteria
Appendix 4-1 represents the Law School‟s written statement of its Applicant Selection Process
as reflected in the current admissions literature. It is essentially unchanged since it was drafted in
1992, although practices have changed in minor ways over the years. See Appendix 4-2
Application Form as it was formulated for 2006-07.
b. The Admissions Committee
In 1997, the Admissions Committee was merged with the Financial Aid Committee, in
conformance with the faculty decision to reduce the number of standing faculty committees. The
Committee is appointed by the Dean; it includes both tenured and clinical faculty, as well as ex
officio members. The Dean attempts to appoint a committee which reflects the diversity of the
faculty as a whole, with the single exception that members of the untenured faculty are not
required to serve because of the time demands placed on the members of the committee.
The Admissions Committee does more than play an advisory role in the admissions operation.
The members personally read hundreds of files each year. This reading of files is a demanding
task, and traditionally the Dean has appointed approximately eight faculty members to the
Committee. In 2005-06, only five faculty members were appointed to the Committee. In the
Fall of 2006, the Dean once again appointed to the Committee seven faculty members and the
Assistant Dean of Admissions, plus an ex officio member, the Director of Financial Aid.
c. Process for Admitting Entry-Level Applicants
The Admissions Staff and the Admissions Committee begin in the late fall to select students to
fill a class of 225 students. Recently, the goal has been to obtain thirty students who will
matriculate in the accelerated program in May (the “summer entrants”) and 195 students who
will matriculate in August (the “fall entrants”). (Prior to a change in our legal writing program in
2000, we used to admit forty-five summer entrants and 180 fall entrants.) Historically, we have
been successful in creating a summer entrant class of the appropriate size by informing certain
applicants in their acceptance letters that they have been admitted only on condition that they
enroll in the summer entrant class. The 225-student goal has remained unchanged since 1972.
In 2006, the summer entrant class consisted of eighteen students, rather than the target number
of thirty. This one-time deviation from our goal was the fault of the Admissions Committee
Chair, who failed to explain to the new Assistant Dean of Admissions our historical practice of
informing certain applicants that they had been admitted only on condition that they enroll with
the summer entrants. Understandably, the Assistant Dean gave admitted students the option of
choosing between the summer and fall entrant classes. This error will not be repeated. We will
158
now return to our former practice of pursuing our numerical goal of thirty summer entrant
students by allocating a sufficient number of applicants to summer entrant status.
The first task for the year facing the Admissions Committee is to choose a presumptive admit
level for residents and non-residents. Presumptive admits are those students with a combined
LSAT and undergraduate GPA that indicate that the applicant will be quite successful as a law
student. The Admissions Committee uses an “index” which weighs the LSAT at 55.6% and the
UGPA at 44.4%. This particular index is in agreement with the findings of the Correlation Study
that is performed on the entering class by the Law School Admission Council (LSAC.) The
index score for the presumptive admit number is selected with a goal of enrolling a class that
maximizes the academic quality of the student body, and with a goal of admitting a class that is
55% resident and 45% non-resident. Another basis for the presumptive admit number is a
determination that, at that level, a review of the file by the Admissions Committee, while
required and necessary, can focus on non-academic factors more than academic factors. Last
year‟s presumptive admit index score for non-residents was 176 and for residents was 175. Onehundred and ten residents were made offers as presumptive admits; fifty-nine enrolled. 275 nonresidents were made offers as presumptive admits; forty-four enrolled. The yield rate of resident
applicants dropped from 61% at the time of the last Self Study to 54% for the Entering Class of
2006, while the yield rate for non-residents held relatively stable at 16-17%. The index formula
is .851(LSAT) + 10.263 (UGPA) + 1.300.
Files are completed and prepared for circulation to the Admissions Committee on a rolling basis.
A completed file consists in part of the application, the narratives and Personal Statement, and a
resume. A completed application also includes the LSDAS Report, which includes transcripts, a
writing sample and letters of recommendation. Finally, letters of recommendation which are sent
directly to the Law School are included in the completed file. Special attention is paid to the
narratives and the Personal Statement. Candidates are asked why they want to go to law school,
why they want to go to The University of Iowa Law School, and what they regard as their most
significant accomplishment. They are also encouraged to inform the Admissions Committee of
any factors that they believe would predict success in law school that are not necessarily
reflected in the numerical indicators.
Students are able to request admission into either the Summer or Fall class, or both. Students
who will not graduate until May are not given serious consideration for the Summer unless there
are some special circumstances. The current deadline for applications for both terms is March 1.
An effort is made to process those files indicating a preference or interest in the summer entrant
class first.
Applications are divided into three categories, based on the LSDAS-calculated index:
Presumptive Admit is one group. This group consists of resident applicants who have an index
of 175 and higher, and non-resident applicants who have an index of 176 and higher. The
Presumptive Deny group is another group. This group consists of resident applicants who have
an index of 165 and lower, and non-resident applicants who have an index of 166 and lower.
The third, and largest, group, is called the “numbers plus” group. This group of applicants
consists of all resident applicants who have an index from 166 to 174, and non-resident
159
applicants who have an index from 167 to 175. In addition, the numbers plus group will include
presumptive admit and presumptive deny files which have been identified by the Assistant Dean
of Admissions or the Admissions Committee Chair as warranting additional review by the
Admissions Committee as a result of a criminal record, academic misconduct, or discrepant
indicators, such as a very high LSAT and a very low UGPA, or vice versa.
All presumptive admit and presumptive deny files are reviewed by the Assistant Dean of
Admissions. The Admissions Committee Chair is given samples from the presumptive admit and
presumptive deny categories, and this procedure enables the Chair to make a good assessment of
whether the presumptive admit and presumptive deny categories are working as designed. The
files that are in the numbers plus category are sent to two Admissions Committee members (a
subcommittee of the Admissions Committee) for review without having been previously
reviewed by either the Assistant Dean of Admissions or the Committee Chair.
On the cover of the file is placed an index card. It includes the applicant‟s name, resident/nonresident status, cumulative GPA, Jr-Sr cumulative GPA, the highest LSAT score earned and the
resulting index, the average LSAT score of all the scores earned and the resulting index, the JScore (the LSDAS index, except that the index is based only on the Jr-Sr GPA), a place to record
the TOEFL score, acknowledgment of test accommodations, acknowledgment of a foreign GPA,
undergraduate school, date of graduation, degree and major, any graduate degrees, conferring
institutions, class rank, session applied for, acknowledgment of criminal convictions, the date
that the LSAT was taken, and a place for the recording of the admission decision. No reference
to race appears on the card.
Each member of the two-person subcommittee of the Admissions Committee gives a vote of 1
to 5, a 5 representing admit, a 1 representing deny. Then, the file is returned to the Assistant
Dean of Admissions, who also gives a vote of 1 to 5. A file needs at least 2 votes of admit in
order to gain admission. A vote of 2 admits and 1 deferred decision will be sent to the Chair (or
to another member of the Admissions Committee if the chair voted on the subcommittee). The
Chair or the Assistant Dean of Admissions (when designated by the Chair), can provide a vote
that will admit, deny, or break a tie. From time to time a committee member will want the entire
committee to review a file, in which case a super-majority is required.
A wide range of criteria goes into the numbers plus review process, the most important of which
are the numerical indicators. Also important are interpersonal skills, work experience, activities
outside of work or school, career focus, motivation, sensitivity to the human condition and
problem-solving skills. In addition, the Admissions Committee is instructed to consider graduate
records, leadership potential, overcoming disadvantageous situations, residency status, a history
of standardized tests that under-predict academic success, membership in a historically underrepresented group, and a myriad of other factors which lead the Admissions Committee to
conclude that the numbers are not the best predictor and that the applicant has something special
by virtue of experience or character to contribute to the educational process. Whether an
applicant will or will not require financial aid is irrelevant to the decision whether to admit.
160
This process continues until the class is filled. For spots remaining after reviewing all the files,
deferred files are reconsidered by the Chair of the Admissions Committee and the Assistant Dean
of Admissions. Once the class is filled, a waiting list is composed. This past year, 308 persons
were placed on the waiting list. Eighteen students on that list were eventually admitted. The
decisions to offer admission to individuals from the waiting list were made by the Assistant Dean
of Admissions, after consulting with the Chair of the Admissions Committee. The decisions were
based on the strength of the vote from the Admissions Committee, residency status (since there is
the desire to achieve a 55%/45% balance between residents and non-residents), and other factors.
The waiting list was used three times this past year: late May, the middle of June, and the middle
of July. The process of taking applicants off the waiting list may continue through the summer,
as candidates decline admission or fail to file their mandatory tuition deposits.
Although it would appear that the majority of the applicants are selected by the numbers plus
process, those numbers can be deceptive. The number of offers of admission that are awarded to
the numbers plus group depends in large part on the yield from the applicants in the presumptive
admit group, plus the desired resident/non-resident balance in the entering class. If the yield for
the presumptive admit group is higher than expected, then there are fewer positions to offer
individuals in the numbers plus group. If the yield for the presumptive admit group is lower than
expected, then there are more positions to offer to the numbers plus group.
The Admissions Committee is comfortable with the admissions process. The numbers plus
process used at Iowa for years is now being replicated by many law schools, especially in the
wake of the 2003 United States Supreme Court decisions involving the University of Michigan
Law School‟s admissions process and the University of Michigan‟s undergraduate admissions
process.
Particular efforts have been made to achieve fairness in the consideration of the files without
abandoning the faculty‟s commitment to the educational benefits of diversity. The files are not
marked or categorized by race or ethnic group; the process for consideration is the same for all
presumptive deny, presumptive admit, and numbers plus files. The Admissions Committee‟s
chief concern is that plenary review of the applications for admission is time consuming, and
quick processing of the files is always a concern. Committee members need to remain
conscientious about reading and reviewing the files. Also, the Admissions Staff, although it
processes all of the applications for admission, is invariably engaged in the post-admission
recruitment phase of the admissions process, a phase which has become one of the most essential
pieces of the admissions operation. It is important that we do not fail to attract admittees because
of delayed offers. It is also important that we make personal contact with admittees in order to
court their interest in enrolling at the Law School. Finally, it is important to recognize that the
Financial Aid Staff is also heavily involved in the post-admission phase of the process, assisting
students in applying for financial aid, making financial aid awards, and ensuring that admitted
students have all of their required documents to insure a timely estimate of financial aid prior to
the time when the students will receive their fall tuition bills on August 1.
161
d. College of Law‟s Strategic Plan 2006-2010
With regard to admissions, the Strategic Plan included the following objectives: 1) Expand our
efforts to enroll a critical mass of minority students; 2) Continue our efforts to enroll more
women law students; 3) Continue to give preference to resident applicants; and 4) Offer
sufficient merit-based and need-based financial aid to enable us to enroll a highly qualified and
diverse student body. The Entering Class of 2006 embodies each of these goals. The
Admissions and Financial Aid Staff is committed to continuing to meet these goals for the next
three years, and beyond that into the future.
5. Readmission and Transfer of Students
The Law School does not readmit our own students or admit students from other schools who
have been previously disqualified for academic reasons. We do not admit transfer students from
non-ABA schools or foreign law schools. In the last year, we did admit four students from ABA
schools.
B. Financial Aid
1. Introduction
Financial aid is an important factor in the effort to recruit the strongest students possible. See
Attachment 4-5 for a copy of the information about financial aid that the Law School sends to
prospective students. But financial aid is important for other reasons as well – it is essential to
the retention of students who might otherwise be forced to withdraw for economic reasons, and
the availability of financial aid in the forms of grants and low-interest loans plays a major role in
providing as much flexibility as possible to students in their career choices. The Law School‟s
ability to offer adequate financial aid in the future will depend upon the increasing availability of
funds to disperse to the students as the cost of legal education continues to rise.
Each year, all students who wish to be considered for need-based aid administered by the Law
School must complete the Free Application for Student Aid (FAFSA) Form. The information
that students provide in the FAFSA Form and in the required supporting documents is compiled
by the UI‟s central financial aid office and then is used by the Financial Aid Staff to determine
the aid to be awarded from its institutional and federal funds.
Recruiting scholarships (e.g., Law Opportunity Fellowships (LOF) and merit scholarships) are
awarded as soon as possible once students are admitted. Early offers of financial aid, especially
those that include merit and need-based grants, are essential to effective recruitment and
matriculation.
2. Financial Aid at the College of Law
As is the case for higher education generally, the cost of legal education at the University of
Iowa has increased since the last Self Study at a rate significantly higher than inflation.
162
Mandatory health and computer fees also have risen. The following tables illustrate the rise in
tuition rates and the rise in the total cost of a Law School education. The last table describes the
scholarships and grants that are currently available.
TABLE 4-4 TUITION RATES FOR 1992, 1998, 2004, 2005, 2006
1992-93
1998-99
2004-05 2005-06
2006-07
Resident Tuition:
$3,444
$6,240
$11,510
$12,320
$13,374
Nonresident Tuition:
$9,476
$16,156
$25,718
$27,098
$28,818
TABLE 4-5 TOTAL COST OF EDUCATION FOR 1998 AND 2004, 2005, 2006
1998-99
2004-05 2005-06
Resident Expenses:
$15,940
$24,038
$28,271 $29,957
Nonresident Expenses:
$25,856
$38,246
$43,049
163
2006-07
$45,401
TABLE 4-6 DESCRIPTION OF SCHOLARSHIPS AND GRANTS AVAILABLE
IN 2004-05 AND 2005-06
Description
Amount in 2004-05
Amount in
2005-06
1. Law Scholarships (LAWS) (merit)
$3,840-$11,510
$4,112$12,320*
$4,112$12,320
2. Law Opportunity Fellowship (LOF)
(need, diversity)
$3,840-$11,510
3. Law Freshman Fellows (LAWFF)
(need and/or merit) (awarded to nonresident
recipients of LAWS or LOF) (the amount is
the differential between resident and nonresident
tuition)
$14,208
4. Law Foundation Merit Scholarships (merit)
$1,000-$1,500
$5,246-$12,320
5. Equal Justice Foundation Dean‟s Match Scholarships
(demonstrated commitment to equal justice and
involvement in EJF)
$250-$2,500
$500-$4,000
6. Law Foundation Endowed Scholarships
(need and/or merit or other, depending upon the
criteria set forth by the donor)
$150-$11,510
$250-$12,230
$15,444
*Resident tuition was $4,112 (summer) and $12,320 (academic year). Nonresident Tuition was
$9,036 (summer) and $27,098 (academic year).
a. Non-loan Based Financial Aid
The Law School has several forms of non-loan financial aid which are either merit-based, needbased, or a combination of both. One form of this scholarship aid is our merit scholarship, which
is awarded before matriculation to both residents and non-residents. The sources of funds for
these merit scholarships are a tuition set-aside and Iowa Law Foundation endowed funds.
Admitted students may be offered up to full non-resident tuition awards in their first year. In
their second and third years, they are offered up to full resident tuition awards combined with an
opportunity to work for the Law School, which qualifies them for resident status.
The College‟s Law Opportunity Fellowships (LOF) provide another substantial source of nonloan financial aid. The source of these LOF funds is a tuition set-aside. These fellowships
provide grants equivalent to the merit-based scholarships described above. LOFs are based on
many factors, including need and diversity.
164
The third form of non-loan financial aid comes from various Iowa Law School Foundation
accounts. The grantor often has provided that scholarships are to be awarded on the basis of
need, merit, or a combination of criteria.
A fourth form of non-loan financial support is the opportunity for upper-class students to be
employed by the Law School (e.g., as a research assistant). When a non-resident is employed by
the Law School, the non-resident then qualifies for resident status, which provides the nonresident with tuition remission in the amount of the difference between non-resident tuition and
resident tuition (e.g., $15,444 in 2006-07). And any student (resident or non-resident) who is
employed by the Law School on a salaried basis qualifies for heavily-subsidized health
insurance. All students who work for the Law School are paid the Iowa minimum wage of $5.15
per hour.
When awarding any type of non-loan based financial aid, the Admissions and Financial Aid Staff
take into account several factors in addition to merit and/or need, such as the applicant‟s fit with
the Law School‟s commitment to increasing the educational benefits of diversity, interpersonal
skills, career involvement, activities in addition to school or work, leadership, career focus,
motivation, sensitivity to the human condition and problem-solving skills. When a scholarship is
funded with endowed accounts, the award criteria are those set forth by the donor.
At the time of our last Self Study, the total amount of non-loan based financial aid was
$2,340,995. That figure rose to $4,859,123 in 2005-06. The following tables depict: 1) our
yield rates on recruiting offers since 1994; and 2) the allocation of our non-loan financial aid.
165
TABLE 4-7 SUMMARY REPORT OF RECRUITING OFFERS & YIELD RATES
1994 ENTRANTS TO 2006 ENTRANTS
LOF
Merit
Resident
Nonres
Entrant
Year
Number Number of LOF
of LOF LOF
Yield
Offers Enrolled
Made
Number Number of Merit
of Merit Merit
Yield
Offers Enrolled
Made
Res
Offer
1994
1995
41
56
28
29
68%
58%
92
49
36
23
39%
47%
133
105
64/133=48%
52/105=50%
64
52
64/244=26%
52/225=23%
1996
48
32
52
21
40%
100
53/100=53%
53
53/219=24% 179/661=27%
1997
47
24
66%
%
%%
51%
93
43
46%
140
67/140=48%
67
67/231=29% 172/657=26%
1998
57
28
49%
94
42
44%
151
70/151=46%
70
70/229=30% 190/657=29%
1999
42
22
52%
88
45
51%
130
67/130=52%
67
67/227=30% 205/664=31%
2000
37
23
62%
83
45
54%
120
68/120=57%
68
68/233=29% 205/689=30%
2001
46
21
46%
101
44
44%
147
65/147=44%
65
65/245=27% 200/705=28%
2002
51
25
49%
91
31
34%
37
15
41%
105
41
39%
142
56/142=39%
56
56/262=21% 189/728=26%
2003
40
24
60%
74
31
42%
46
24
55%
68
31
46%
114
55/114=48%
55
55/220=25% 176/728=24%
2004
49
26
53%
92
41
45%
43
23
53%
98
44
45%
141
67/141=48%
67
66/248=27% 178/730=24%
2005
44
20
46%
126
54
43%
74
38
51%
96
36
38%
170
74/170=44%
74
74/227=33% 195/695=28%
2006
59*
26*
44%
159* 50*
31%
59
32
54%
160
45
28%
219
77/219=35%
77
77/210=37% 218/685=32%
Res
Enroll
Res
Yield
NR
Offers
Total
Recruiting
Offers
NR
Enroll
NR
Yield
Total
Recruiting Offers
Number of Yield Rate
Merit and
LOF Offers
Total
Enrolled
with
Recruiting
Offers
Total
Percentage of
Total J.D. Students
Number of Enrolled First Year Receiving Merit or
Merit plus Class with Recruiting LOF Awards
LOF
Merit or LOF Awards
Enrolled per
Entering
Class
* The 2006 LOF and Merit categories do not include one recruiting scholarship offer made to and accepted by an international student from
the CLEO program.
166
TABLE 4-8 ALLOCATION OF NEED-BASED AND MERIT-BASED SCHOLARSHIPS,
FELLOWSHIPS AND GRANTS AVAILABLE IN 1998-99, 2004-05, AND 2005-06
1.
2.
3.
4.
1998-99
N/A
2004-05
125
2005-06
107
b. Total Amount of Need-Based Scholarships,
Fellowships and Grants
N/A
$1,302,404
$1,373,367
a. Total Number of Recipients of
Non-Need-Based Scholarships,
Fellowships and Grants
87
142
112
b. Total Amount of Non-Need-Based
Scholarships, Fellowships and Grants
$450,243
$1,105,426
$1,203,960
a. Total Number of Recipients of Need Plus
Other Factors Scholarships, Fellowships
and Grants
286
233
249
b. Total Amount of Need Plus Other Factors
$1,890,752
$2,343,002
$2,281,796
a. Total Unduplicated Number of Recipients of
316
407
342
b. Total Amount of Scholarships, Fellowships
and Grants
$2,340,995
$4,750,832
$4,859,123
a. Total Number of Recipients of Need-Based
167
TABLE 4-9 DISTRIBUTION OF SCHOLARSHIPS AND GRANTS IN 1998-99, 2004-05,
2005-06
1. Percentage of tuition
a.
b.
c.
d.
Less than ½ tuition
½ tuition or more but less than full tuition
Full tuition
More than full tuition
Number of Recipients
1998-99
2004-05
2005-06
79
116
90
14
29
22
158
129
142
2
6
5
2. Total number of students receiving
scholarships and grants
253
280
3. Median grant amount of aid per recipient
$6,822
$11,371
259
$12,320
It is obvious that both the LOF and merit scholarships are essential tools in recruiting the
strongest class possible. But the Law School must be vigilant to make sure that both programs
are secure. The largest single source of funding for the LOF and merit scholarships is the tuition
set-aside program, which may be particularly vulnerable. Traditionally, the Law School has
received a higher percentage of tuition set-aside funds than some other colleges within the
University because of the Law School‟s leadership in recruiting an academically talented and
nationally diverse student body. The Law School continues to receive one of the largest
percentages of these tuition set-aside funds, but the Law School has been advised that it will
receive a smaller percentage of these funds in the future.
b. Loans
While the Law School has been able to provide 52% of our students with grants, scholarships,
research assistantships, and tuition remissions, the bulk of the financial aid continues to take the
form of loans. The types of loans available to law students include Iowa Law School Foundation
loans, Federal Perkins loans, federally subsidized and non-subsidized loans, and other
miscellaneous private educational loans. At the time of the last Self Study, the total amount of
loan-based financial aid was $8,131,366. That figure rose to $13,801,189 in 2005-06. Not
surprisingly, the average student‟s debt load upon graduation increased accordingly from
$40,253 in 1997-98 to $63,798 in 2005-06. Table 4-10 illustrates the growth in the average Law
School student loan debt since 1993-94.
This increasing debt load upon graduation is constraining the flexibility of students to seek out
and accept post-graduation employment, most frequently in the “public interest” sector. The
College, in conjunction with the Iowa Law School Foundation Board, has established three new
programs to help ease the burden for those students who choose low-salaried, public interest
employment. The new programs include the Public Interest Law Grant, from endowed funds, and
two loan repayment assistance programs (the ILSF Public Interest Loan Forgiveness Program
and the ILSF Iowa Lawyer Loan Forgiveness Pilot Program). (A document summarizing all of
168
our Public Interest Programs appears as Attachment 4-6.) The Iowa State Bar Association also
has a task force on developing a state-wide loan repayment assistance program, and Dean
Carolyn Jones is a member of that task force.
169
TABLE 4-10 AVERAGE LAW SCHOOL STUDENT LOAN DEBT 1993-94 THROUGH
2005-06
Academic
Year
1993-94
1994-95
Average Three Year Average Monthly
Annual Number Total
Average Law School Debt * Student Loan
of Student Loan Annual
Principal
Payment #
Annual
Borrowers
Loan Debt Debt
480
$4,354,010
$9,070 1991-92 & 1992-93 1991-92 & 1992-93
figures are
figures are
not available
not available
502
$5,464,260
$10,885
1992-1993 figures 1992-1993 figures
are not available are not available
1995-96
548
$7,028,480
$12,826
1996 Graduate
$32,781
$402
1996-97
549
$7,426,884
$13,528
$457
1997-98
585
$8,131,366
$13,899
1997 Graduate
$37,239
1998 Graduate
$40,253
1998-99
633
$8,558,450
$13,520
$502
1999-00
566
$8,827,510
$15,596
1999 Graduate
$40,947
2000 Graduate
$43,015
2000-01
541
$9,077,702
$16,775
$563
2001-02
551
$10,504,990
$19,065
2001 Graduate
$45,891
2002 Graduate
$51,436
2002-03
662
$12,644,667
$19,100
$674
2003-04
641
$12,886,724
$20,104
2004-05
653
$13,360,194
$20,460
2005-06
594
$13,801,189
$23,234
2003 Graduate
$54,940
2004 Graduate
$58,269
2005 Graduate
$59,665
2006 Graduate
$63,798
* These figures do not include Bar Exam Loan debt nor do the figures include any student loan debt incurred prior to law school.
# Based on the standard student loan ten year repayment plan at 8.25% (capped) interest rate.
170
$494
$526
$631
$715
$732
$782
c. Stipends and Tuition Remissions
The final important form of financial aid consists of very modest stipends for law school-based
employment and resulting tuition remissions for non-resident students. Under University
regulations, non-residents who have certain education-related employment for at least 25% time
are considered residents for tuition purposes. The resulting reduction in tuition is a significant
element of a non-resident‟s financial aid package (see Section B.2.a above).
Employment-based aid, including tuition remission for nonresidents, plays an important role in
providing financial aid packages to the students. Additionally, the nature of the employment is
important to the various missions of the Law School. Research assistants assist faculty with their
scholarship. Stipends to high-ranking officers in the student-run co-curricular programs
underwrite these important activities. And these employment opportunities should enhance the
students‟ academic experience. Employment-based financial aid should continue to constitute a
meaningful part of the College‟s financial aid scheme. The following chart describes the Law
School‟s research assistant funding plans for 2007-08.
171
RESEARCH ASSISTANT FUNDING PLANS FOR 2007-08
PROJECTED NON-RESIDENT L2 & L3 ENROLLMENT FOR FY 2007-08
L3 104
L2 107
Total = 211
The projected non-resident L2 & L3 enrollment for FY 2007-08 is 211 students, which is an
increase of 16 students from FY 2006-07. The projected increase in cost for 16 additional nonresidents is 16 x $1,803 (FY 06-07 academic year appointment salary plus fringe) = $28,848.
Our FY 07 RA tuition supplement support was $75,000. To help in accommodating the increase
in non-residents seeking RA appointments, we have increased our FY 08 RA tuition supplement
support by $16,400 for a total FY 08 RA tuition supplement support of $91,400. The rest of the
increased cost of funding the additional number of non-resident students wanting RA positions
($12,708) will come from the Iowa Law School Foundation Development Fund.
NON-RESIDENT L2 & L3 ENROLLMENT FOR FY 2006-07
L3 91
L2 104
Total = 195 (up 30 from FY 2005-06)
NON-RESIDENT L2 & L3 ENROLLMENT FOR FY 2005-06
L3 74
L2 91
Total = 165 (down 1 from FY 2004-05)
172
d. Financial Aid Summaries and Conclusion
The following financial aid summaries for 1998-1999, 2004-05, and 2005-06 illustrate the trends
in the sources of the Law School‟s financial aid funding. The summaries identify the amount of
money that is allocated to scholarships, tuition remission, employment, and loans.
In conclusion, the Law School is doing a good job in making financial aid available to its
students in a difficult environment of increasing tuition and costs. The allocation of financial aid
should be reviewed periodically to determine whether it continues to assist our recruiting and
retention efforts. The Law School will continue to increase support for graduates who accept
offers of employment in the “public interest” sector upon graduation by funding scholarships,
grants, and loan repayment assistance programs. Finally, the Law School administration needs to
be vigilant in asserting the College‟s interests in retaining its present level of funding for
financial aid. Without adequate financial aid, the Law School will not be able to maintain the
current academic excellence and diversity of the student body.
173
ATTACHMENT 4-1 FINANCIAL AID SUMMARY
FISCAL YEAR 1998-99
SCHOLARSHIPS
SOURCES
Foundation
Tuition Set-Aside*
Other
(450,243 + 525,485)
$
$
$
332,125
975,728
108,605
SUBTOTAL
$
1,416,458
TUITION WAIVER**
Tuition Waiver**
$
1,056,054
EMPLOYMENT
SOURCES
Work-Study
$ 42,560
Federal & State
$ 27,664
University Contribution
$ 14,896
Research Assistant Salaries & Co-Curricular Stipends
$ 370,308
Foundation
$ 250,000
Murray Fund
$ 10,000
Tuition Set-Aside
$ 74,204
Other
$ 36,104
SUBTOTAL
$ 412,868
LOANS
SOURCES
Foundation
$ 574,390
UI Federal Perkins
$ 241,050
Federal Direct Ford Subsidized
$ 4,400,715
Federal Direct Ford Unsubsidized
$ 3,069,909
Other Private Educational
$ 272,386
SUBTOTAL
TOTAL
(Does not Include Tuition Waiver)
TOTAL
(Includes Tuition Waiver)
$
8,558,450
$ 10,387,776
$ 11,443,830
* Tuition Set-Aside scholarships are funded by a portion of student tuition payments.
**A non-resident student receives a tuition waiver or reduction to resident tuition when the student is employed by the Law School as a
Research Assistant.
174
FISCAL YEAR 2004-05
SCHOLARSHIPS
SOURCES
Foundation ($45,000 Merit, $11,968 EJF Match, $420,040 Named Accts)
Tuition Set-Aside* ($793,120 +$832,538+$529,308)
Other
SUBTOTAL
TUITION WAIVER**
Tuition Waiver**
EMPLOYMENT
SOURCES
Work-Study
Federal & State
$
477,008
$ 2,154,966
$
129,665
$ 2,761,639
$ 2,118,858
$
$
$
$
$
31,370
$
356,196
15,685
15,685
Foundation
Tuition Set-Aside
Murray Fund
SUBTOTAL
LOANS
SOURCES
Foundation
UI Federal Perkins
$
251,642
74,554
30,000
$
387,566
$ 856,070
$ 300,000
$ 5,096,501
$ 5,526,512
$ 1,581,111
SUBTOTAL
TOTAL (Does not Include Tuition Waiver)
$13,360,194
$16,509,399
TOTAL (Includes Tuition Waiver)
$18,628,257
* Tuition Set-Aside scholarships are funded from a portion of student tuition payments.
**A non-resident student receives a tuition waiver or a reduction to resident tuition charge when the student is employed by the Law School
as a minimum of a quarter-time Research Assistant.
175
FISCAL YEAR 2005-06
SCHOLARSHIPS
SOURCES
Foundation ($85,000 Merit, $21,250 EJF Match, $412,755 Named Accts, $89,685 BF Sum)
Tuition Set-Aside* ($755,333 LAWS + $865,380 LOF + $604,355 LAWFF)
Murray Fund
Other
SUBTOTAL
TUITION WAIVER**
Tuition Waiver**
EMPLOYMENT
SOURCES
Work-Study
Federal & State
$3,074,372
$1,976,025
$ 30,750
$
$
15,375
15,375
Foundation
Tuition Set-Aside
$ 608,690
$ 2,225,068
$
31,000
$ 209,614
$
$
$ 354,953
275,871
79,082
SUBTOTAL
LOANS
SOURCES
Foundation ($80,000 new funding)
UI Federal Perkins
$ 385,703
$ 828,740
$ 292,170
$ 4,803,903
$ 5,302,558
$ 2,573,818
SUBTOTAL
TOTAL (Does not Include Tuition Waiver)
$13,801,189
$17,261,264
TOTAL (Includes Tuition Waiver)
$19,237,289
* Tuition Set-Aside scholarships are funded from a portion of student tuition payments.
**A non-resident student receives a tuition waiver or a reduction to resident tuition charge when the student is employed by the Law School
as a minimum of a quarter-time Research Assistant.
176
ATTACHMENT 4-4 ANNUAL LETTER FROM THE ADMISSIONS OFFICE
TO THE DEAN 2006
Memo
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Dean Jones, Collins Byrd, Linda McGuire and Jill DeYoung
Jan Barnes
August 15, 2006
Summer and Fall 2006 Entrants -FINAL
Here is some information regarding the summer and fall entrants.
I have entered last year’s information in bold for comparison.
103
107
0
210
119
104
2
225
Residents
Nonresidents
NR/R
Total
8
23
12
2
45
8
18
9
1
36
African American
Asian American
Hispanic
Native American
Total Minorities
115
95
210
120
105
225
Males
Females
Total
4
1
Foreign
I have used the high LSAT if taken more than once for this year’s figures, but last year’s
figures show the average LSAT if taken more than once.
Top LSAT entering:
Lowest LSAT entering:
175
145
172
149
Top GPA entering:
Lowest GPA entering:
4.12
2.35
4.20
2.59
Average LSAT:
Median LSAT:
160
161
160
161
Average GPA:
Median GPA:
3.58
3.62
3.57
3.58
75th Percentile LSAT:
25th Percentile LSAT:
163
158
163
158
177
75th Percentile GPA:
25th Percentile GPA:
3.83
3.40
3.77
3.38
Total non-traditional students entering in this years summer and fall class:
(30 years of age or older)
Average age of summer and fall entrants:
Median age of summer and fall entrants:
25
24
25
24
Average age of summer and fall non-traditional entrants:
Median age of summer and fall non-traditional entrants:
36
34
35
33
Oldest summer or fall entrant:
Youngest summer or fall entrant:
48
20
15
23
53
20
35 (32) different states and 4 (2) foreign countries (Foreign countries represented are: Cameroon,
Canada, China and Jamaica) (States represented are: AZ, CA, CO, CT, DC, FL, GA, IA, ID, IL,
IN, KS, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MT, NC, ND, NE, NJ, NV, NY, OH, OK, PA, RI, SD, TN,
TX, VA, VT, WA, WI)
96 (99) different undergraduate institutions
Amherst College (1)
Augustana College-SD (1)
Boston University (2)
Bowdoin College (1)
Brigham Young University (2)
Brigham Young University-Idaho (1)
Brown University (2)
California State University-Fullerton (1)
Case Western Reserve University (2)
Central College (3)
Clarke College-IA (1)
Colgate University (2)
College of William and Mary (1)
Concordia College (2)
Cornell College (1)
Cornell University-NY (1)
Creighton University (2)
Dakota Wesleyan University (1)
De Paul University (1)
Dordt College (1)
Drake University (4)
Emory University (1)
George Washington University (1)
Georgia Institute of Technology (1)
Georgia State University (1)
Grand Valley State University (1)
178
Grinnell College (6)
Harvard University (1)
Indiana University-Bloomington (2)
Iowa State University (18)
Kansas State University (2)
Lake Forest College (1)
Lawrence University (1)
Loras College (1)
Loyola University-Chicago (2)
Marquette University (1)
Michigan State University (1)
Middlebury College (1)
Mount Mercy College (2)
New York University Tisch School of the Arts (1)
North Carolina Agriculture & Technical State University (1)
Northwestern University (7)
Oberlin College (1)
Ohio State University-Columbus (1)
Oklahoma State University-Stillwater (1)
Pennsylvania State University-University Park (1)
Pepperdine University-Malibu (1)
Pomona College (1)
Saint Ambrose University (1)
San Diego State University (2)
Scripps College (1)
Southwest Minnesota State University (2)
Suny at Buffalo Center (1)
Swarthmore College (1)
United States Military Academy (1)
University of Akron (1)
University of California-Berkeley (1)
University of California-Davis (1)
University of California-Los Angeles (3)
University of California-San Diego (2)
University of Central Florida (1)
University of Chicago (2)
University of Colorado-Boulder (1)
University of Florida (1)
University of Illinois-Urbana (7)
University of International Business and Economics-China (1)
University of Iowa (43)
University of Kansas (1)
University of Maryland-College Park (1)
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor (2)
University of Minnesota-Minneapolis (3)
University of Missouri-Columbia (3)
University of Nebraska-Lincoln (2)
University of Nevada-Reno (1)
University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill (1)
179
University of North Dakota-Grand Forks (1)
University of Northern Iowa (7)
University of Notre Dame (1)
University of Oklahoma (1)
University of St. Thomas-Minnesota (1)
University of Texas-Austin (1)
University of Vermont (1)
University of Washington (2)
University of Wisconsin-Madison (4)
University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point (1)
Wabash College (1)
Wake Forest University (1)
Waldorf College (1)
Wartburg College (1)
Wellesley College (1)
Western Michigan University (1)
Wheaton College-Illinois (1)
Whitman College (1)
Whitworth College (1)
Williams College (1)
Yale University (1)
46 (58) different undergraduate majors
Accounting (9)
Anthropology (1)
Any Area Not Listed - Other (1)
Art History (3)
Art/Design (1)
Asian American Studies (1)
Biology, General (5)
Business Administration (1)
Business Management (4)
Business Management/Administration (1)
Chemical Engineering (2)
Chemistry, General (3)
Civil Engineering (1)
Communications (5)
Criminal Justice (2)
Criminology (2)
Drama/Theatre Arts (2)
Economics (7)
Electrical Engineering (2)
English (19)
Finance (12)
French (1)
German (1)
History (19)
Humanities - Other (1)
Industrial Engineering (2)
180
Information Sciences (1)
International Relations (4)
Journalism (8)
Law (2)
Law and Society (1)
Literature (2)
Marketing (5)
Mechanical Engineering (1)
Music (1)
Philosophy (7)
Physics, General (1)
Policy Studies (1)
Political Science (50)
Psychology (8)
Public Affairs/Services/Administration (1)
Religion/Religious Studies (2)
Social Sciences-Other (3)
Sociology (2)
Spanish (1)
Women‟s Studies (1)
18 (30) summer or fall entrants have earned graduate degrees
Accountancy (3)
Adult and Higher Education
Business Administration
Counseling and Personnel Services
Economics (2)
English/American Literature
European Studies
Global Ethics
Journalism and Mass Communications
LL.M.
Modern U.S. Political and Diplomatic History
Philosophy
Public Affairs
Public Policy
Secondary English Education
181
ATTACHMENT 4-5 FINANCING YOUR LEGAL EDUCATION 2007-2008
2007-2008
FINANCING
YOUR LEGAL
EDUCATION
2006-2007 ACADEMIC YEAR
TUITION AND MANDATORY
FEES
Resident*
Tuition
Mandatory
Fees
Total
$13,374
1,168
$14,542
Non-Resident*
Tuition
Mandatory
Fees
Total
$28,818
1,168
$29,986
COLLEGE OF LAW
Office of Financial Aid
280 Boyd Law Building
Iowa City, IA 52242-1113
1-800-553-IOWA, ext. 9142
319-335-9142 Fax 319-3359019
[email protected]
INTRODUCTION
All information concerning financial aid programs is subject to change without
notice.
The College of Law administers its substantial financial aid program to
advance the goals of its selective admissions policy. Grants, scholarships,
work-study funds and loans are awarded on a need or merit basis for the
purpose of providing access to legal education for the talented and diverse
students admitted to the college. A number of part-time employment
opportunities are also available to upper-level students.
Although financial aid awards are not made until after applicants are admitted to
the college, applicants should not wait for their notice of admission before filing
the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). Admitted students who
provide the required documents are informed of their eligibility for financial aid
in an award notification letter. Students must reapply for aid every year.
Applicants are urged to investigate other sources of aid as well. Public libraries,
private and civic organizations, and the Internet are excellent resources for
information about financial aid.
Questions and inquiries? Please contact the offices listed below, and include
your name, phone number, and social security number with any financial aid
correspondence:
Office of Student Financial Aid
University of Iowa
208 Calvin Hall
Iowa City, IA 522421315
319-335-1450 / 800-553-IOWA
Office of Financial Aid
280 Boyd Law Building
Iowa City, IA 52242-1113
319-335-9142 / 800-553-IOWA, Ext
9142
http://www.uiowa.edu/~lawcoll
[email protected]
http://www.uiowa.edu/~finaid
[email protected]
HOW FINANCIAL NEED IS
DETERMINED
Financial Need is determined as
follows:
2006-2007 ACADEMIC YEAR ESTIMATED COST OF EDUCATION*
(FINANCIAL AID BUDGET)
Tuition:
Mandatory Fees
182
Resident
$13,374
1,168
Non-Resident
$28,818
1,168
Books & Supplies1,2
Room and Board1, 2
Personal Expenses1, 2
Transportation1, 2
COST OF EDUCATION minus
STUDENT CONTRIBUTION =
FINANCIAL NEED.
The student contribution is based on
the student and spouse‟s income
from the previous year, current
assets, savings, and investments.
Homes are not included in the asset
calculation.
Eligible students may borrow their
student contribution through the
Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan
and or a Federal Direct
Graduate/Professional PLUS Loan.
Total Estimated Cost of
Education3
1
2,300
9,180
3,075
860
$29,957
2,300
9,180
3,075
860
$45,401
Estimated figures.
The student financial aid budget provides $1,457 per month in living expenses and $1,150 each
semester for books and supplies.
3
The Total Estimated Cost of Education is used to determine your maximum financial aid
eligibility.
2
183
SCHOLARSHIPS, FELLOWSHIPS, EMPLOYMENT AND LOAN PROGRAMS
 SCHOLARSHIPS/FELLOWSHIPS
A separate application is not required for these scholarships and fellowships. Recipients are
notified by letter. All students admitted to the College of Law who apply for financial aid
through the FAFSA process, including submitting the appropriate supporting documents, are
automatically considered for the following:

Need-Based Scholarships. Awards may range from $500 to full resident tuition.

Merit Scholarships and Fellowships. These awards are based on academic
achievement. Potential aid renewal for the second and third year for some merit
scholarships and fellowships requires maintenance of class rank in the top 25%. Awards
may range from $500 to full resident tuition with a research-assistantship component in
upper-level years.

UI Law Foundation Scholarships. The University of Iowa Law Foundation
Scholarships includes scholarships that are merit based, need based and a combination of
need and merit. These scholarships are awarded to a limited number of students who
meet the criteria established by the scholarship donors, as funds are available. Awards
may range from $200 to full resident tuition.

Law Opportunity Fellowships. The College of Law is committed to affording
opportunity for a legal career to persons historically underrepresented in the legal
profession. The Law Opportunity Fellowship Program (LOF) was established by the
University to provide access to law school for students from groups and backgrounds
historically under-represented within the academic community. Among the criteria
considered in awarding the fellowships are: educationally and/or socio-economically
disadvantaged backgrounds, existing educational debt load, leadership potential,
academic merit, and importance of the fellowship award to a student‟s financial ability to
attend law school. Awards may range from $3,000 to full nonresident tuition for three
years and the opportunity to hold a research-assistant position for the second and third
years.
 EMPLOYMENT
The College of Law discourages student employment the first year in law school due to the
intensive course schedule. In no event may a full-time student work more than 20 hours per
week.

Research Assistant Positions. Research Assistant positions are available with many
faculty members only for second and third year students. Check the law school financial
aid section of the web site for further information on obtaining a research assistant
position.
184
For those students classified as a non-resident for tuition purposes, a quarter-time
Research Assistant position (ten hours per week) will change your tuition status during
that semester to resident tuition, thus altering your financial aid package.

UI Student Part-Time Employment. There are part-time student employment positions
throughout the university. You do not need to apply for financial aid to work in these
positions. You may access information regarding employment positions through the
University of Iowa Student Information Services Jobnet at:
www.bo.uiowa.edu/~finaid/jobform.cfm.

UI Federal College Work-Study. College Work-Study is available to a limited number
of students in their second and/or third year at the college. A Work-Study award enables
you to work in a Work-Study position throughout the University. Work-Study may
reduce your Federal Direct Loan eligibility. You must demonstrate financial eligibility
through the FAFSA process.

Law-Related Employment. The College of Law Career Services Office, located in
Room 276 Boyd Law Building, provides many opportunities for you to explore legal
employment options during and after your legal education.

Community Employment. A limited number of jobs are available throughout the local
legal community. There are many opportunities for non-legal employment in the area.
You should contact employers directly.
 LOANS

William D. Ford Federal Direct (Stafford) Loan Program
Subsidized. The 2006-2007 interest rate for first-time borrowers for students in an inschool, grace, or deferment period is fixed at 6.8%. Interest does not begin to accrue, nor
will principal payments begin, until six months after the student is no longer enrolled at
least half time. Students must show financial need through the FAFSA process. The
annual (e.g. August 2006 through July 2007) maximum is $8,500.
All students are expected to borrow the maximum $8,500 subsidized Ford Federal Direct
Loan before the Federal Perkins or The University of Iowa Law School Foundation
Loans is awarded.
Unsubsidized. The 2006-2007 interest rate for first time borrowers for students in an inschool, grace, or deferment period is fixed at 6.8%. Payment on the principal and interest
may be deferred, but interest does accrue from the time of disbursement. If payment on
the interest is deferred, the interest is capitalized. Students must show eligibility through
the FAFSA process. The annual (e.g., August 2006 through July 2007) maximum for the
Subsidized plus the Unsubsidized Ford Federal Direct (Stafford) Loan program is
$20,500.
185

Federal Perkins Loan. The Federal Perkins Loan is awarded, as funds are available, to
a very limited number of students who demonstrate exceptional financial need through
the FAFSA process. The interest rate is 5%. Interest does not accrue and principal
payments are deferred until nine months after you are no longer enrolled at least halftime. Federal Perkins Loan awards range from $1,000 to $4,000.

The University of Iowa Law School Foundation Loan. The University of Iowa Law
School Foundation Loan is awarded, as funds are available, to a limited number of
students who demonstrate exceptional financial need through the FAFSA process. The
interest rate is 5%. Interest does not accrue, and interest and principal payments are
deferred until six months after you are no longer enrolled at least half-time. Awards
range from $1,000 to $4,000.

PLUS Loans for Graduate and Professional Students. The PLUS loan for graduate
and professional students is available to meet your total estimated cost of education (see
Page 1). This loan has a federal credit check process. This review looks for negative
credit only. The 2006-2007 interest rate will be 7.9%.

Bar Exam Loan. Private educational loans are available for students to borrow funds for
the costs associated with taking the bar, bar registration, bar review, and living expenses.
A credit check is required; you may need a creditworthy cosigner. Applications are
available on-line at www.accessgroup.org or by telephone at 1-800-282-1550.
FINANCIAL AID CHECKLIST FOR FALL 2007 AND SPRING 2008
All law students are considered self-supporting for federal financial aid purposes. Parental
income/asset information is not considered in determining your financial need.
 2007-2008 FAFSA. File the FAFSA on the web at www.fafsa.ed.gov and submit all
required documents as soon as possible after January 1. Since some funds are limited.
You may use reasonable estimates of your 2006 income to allow you to complete the FAFSA
early. The federal school code for The University of Iowa is 001892. After you are
admitted and as files become complete, financial aid applications will be reviewed and award
letters will be mailed to you. You must reapply every year.
 2007-2008 University of Iowa Institutional Verification Form (IVF). Three to four weeks
after the University of Iowa has received the information from your 2007-2008 FAFSA,
admitted students will receive instructions regarding the IVF. You may be instructed to
download and print the IVF from the ISIS web site http://isis.uiowa.edu. (Log in, go to the
heading Student Records, click on Financial Aid, and then click on Verification Form).
 2006 Federal Tax Return. Submit a signed and dated copy of your 2006 Federal Income
Tax Return (including all schedules) or IRS Form 1722 to the UI Student Financial Aid
186
Office at 208 Calvin Hall, Iowa City, IA 52242. If you will not file a 2006 federal income
tax return, you will be asked to verify this on the University of Iowa Verification Form.
 Direct Loan Master Promissory Note. First time borrowers only. http://dlenote.ed.gov
 PLUS Graduate and Professional Loan. First time borrowers only.
https://dlenote.ed.gov/empn/completenew_plus.jsp
 Entrance Counseling. First time borrowers of the Federal Direct Ford Loan. Visit
www.uiowa.edu/finaid/loans/counseling and complete the Entrance Counseling requirement.
 Direct Deposit Authorization. Direct deposit of financial aid can be authorized via ISIS
(under Student Records/Bank Information).
 Law Foundation Loan (LFL) & Perkins Loan Promissory Notes. The LFL & Perkins
Loan promissory notes will be mailed to you.
 Update your address and anticipated graduation date with the Registrar’s Office on the
ISIS system at https://login.uiowa.edu/uip/login.page?service=https://isis5.uiowa.edu/isis/
SPECIAL TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF EDUCATION INCREASES
Your financial aid eligibility cannot be increased for car payments and/or credit card debt. You may have
your total estimated cost of education increased for loan eligibility with proper documentation for the following
costs:
1.
Student medical expenses not covered
by insurance.
2.
Commuting more than 100 miles a
day.
3.
Childcare expenses. If you have
dependent children living with you
and have daycare costs for your
children while you attend law school,
your eligibility for financial aid may
be increased for your childcare costs.
For a “Request for Childcare
Expenses” form e-mail [email protected].
4.
Computer purchase. A computer may be purchased through an outside
vendor or from a UI selected vendor. For information on UI selected
vendors visit www.its.uiowa.edu/cs/helpdesk/demo/ or call 319-3844357.






Students initiate the process to include computer costs in the cost
of attendance. Eligible computer costs include the cost of the
computer, 17” monitor, printer, handheld, surge protector,
connecting cables, word processing software (Microsoft Office or
equivalent) and anti-virus software.
Costs will only be allowed if either a purchase invoice or a
purchase receipt supports them.
The maximum amount that we will allow is $3,000.
Only one computer may be added to your student loan eligibility
as a law student.
First year students are allowed to include the cost of computers
purchased on or after June 1st of their entering academic year.
Requests to include computer costs must be made prior to the last
day for downward tuition and fee adjustments of the student‟s final
semester at the University of Iowa.
For special budget requests, please contact the financial aid staff in 280 Boyd Law Building or the UI‟s central financial aid
office at 208 Calvin Hall and ask for a financial aid counselor. (See full contact information on page 1.) Special budget
requests must be accompanied by appropriate documentation by the appropriate agency and provided to the UI central
financial aid office.
187
BILLING OF TUITION, FEES AND UNIVERSITY HOUSING AND BOARD CHARGES
All contracted charges (tuition/fees, university family housing) will be billed in full for the term
on the first billing. Non financial-aid recipients have three payment options during the Fall and
Spring semesters:
1.
Pay the Balance in Full at the beginning of each semester. If you choose to pay the full
amount of the contracted items, you will pay the total shown as the Balance Due by the date
indicated on your bill, approximately August 22 & approximately January 22 Summer bills
are due approximately June 22.
2.
Pay the Minimum Periodic Payment through the Deferred Payment Plan. By paying the
Minimum Periodic Payment, you will automatically become enrolled in this plan and you
will be assessed a $20.00 Deferred Payment Fee, once per semester, or a $15.00 Deferred
Payment Fee for summer on the last billing statement. Students will have their contracted
items (tuition, room and board) billed in three installments per semester as follows:
 Fall: August, September,
October
3.
 Spring: January,
February, March

Summer: June,
July
Participate in the Optional Payment Plan. This plan is offered through Academic
Management Service (AMS), a private organization, authorized by The University of Iowa
to contact students and parents. If you participate in the Academic Management Optional
Payment Plan, you will make payments to AMS for a 10-month period to cover contracted
charges (tuition, room and board) for an academic year. Five of these payments will be
applied towards each semester. Payments in this program typically begin in June prior to the
beginning of the academic year. There is a $50 annual fee. For specific information, contact
AMS at (800) 635-0120. NOTE: Any charges not covered by Academic Management
Services will be due to the University of Iowa each month.
188
ATTACHMENT 4-6 THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA COLLEGE OF LAW PUBLIC
INTEREST LAW PROGRAMS
The University of Iowa College of Law Public Interest Law Programs
Equal Justice Foundation (EJF) Summer Stipends
2005-06: Twenty-three students, $42,500 awarded
Established:
Prior to 1991
Intent:
Help make it financially feasible for students to contribute their time and
legal skills in their summer breaks to people who normally would not have
access to legal advocacy.
Description:
EJF students raise funds each year through a series of fundraisers. EJF
manages the application and selection process and awards are based
primarily on applicant‟s participation in EJF fundraising events and
general commitment to public interest. The law foundation matches the
funds raised each year by the students in the Equal Justice Foundation.
Public Interest Law Award
2005-06: Two graduates, $10,000 awarded
Established:
In 1988 by the Classes of 1987 & 1988
Intent:
Honor and support law school graduates who choose to enter the field of
public interest law.
Description:
The recipient must have more than $5,000 in student loan debt,
demonstrate the procurement of employment in public interest law, an
area which includes but is not limited to legal assistance groups, public
defenders offices, special interest and minority group advocates and civil
liberties unions. The recipients starting and projected average annual
salary derived from the employment described above must have a salary
less than 125% of the “standard maintenance allowance (SMA).” 125% of
the SMA for non high cost areas for 2006 is $41,648 and for high cost
areas it is $47,989. Recipients are selected by a committee comprised of a
member of the establishing class, faculty and staff.
189
Iowa Law Foundation Public Interest Law Grant
2005-06: Four graduates, $20,000 awarded
Established:
1995
Intent:
To facilitate students engaging in public interest legal work.
Description:
The Iowa Law Foundation Board, at the recommendation of students and
faculty, agreed that $20,000 of annual spendable earnings from non
restricted endowed scholarship accounts be awarded in the form of grants
to 3-5 third year students. The recipients must have demonstrated a
commitment to pursing public interest work and have substantial
indebtedness from student loans. If a recipient of this grant does not
procure employment in public interest work their grant converts to a loan
under the same terms of the ILSFL program. Recipients are selected by a
committee of faculty and staff.
Public Interest Summer Internship Class of 1998 Fund
2005-06: Four students, $1,200 awarded
Established:
1998
Intent:
Support students who pursue summer internships at public interest
organizations.
Description:
Recipients must be a currently enrolled law student and must demonstrate
procurement of summer employment in public interest law, an area which
includes Internal Revenue Code 501(c)(3) entities, government agencies,
and advocacy groups. Projected summer employment compensation must
be either low or unpaid. The applicant‟s level of need and the intensity of
commitment to public interest law are the primary criteria for selection.
Academic achievement will not be considered a factor. Recipients are
selected by a committee of faculty and staff.
Boyd Service Award
2005-06: Twenty recipients
Established:
2005
Intent:
A program administered by the Iowa Student Bar Association to
encourage and recognize public service.
Description:
To recognize law students who provide volunteer services to charitable,
religious, civic, community, governmental and educational organizations
in furtherance of those organizations‟ missions to improve the community.
190
ILSF Public Interest Loan Forgiveness Program
2001-06:
Twenty-seven graduates, $108,353 principal & interest forgiven
Established:
2000
Intent:
Encourage J.D. graduates to pursue careers in the field of public interest
law by establishing a loan forgiveness program for Iowa Law Foundation
Student Loans.
Description:
Applicants for this program must be employed on a full-time basis, in a
law-related capacity by an organization which is exempt from federal
income taxation as an organization described in Section 501 (c) (3) of the
Internal Revenue Code, must have Iowa Law School Foundation Loan
debt, must have a salary less than 125% of the “standard maintenance
allowance (SMA).” 125% of the SMA for 2006 is $41,648 for low cost
areas and $47,989 for high cost areas. After one year of qualified
employment applicants must provide written documentation from their
employer confirming the applicant‟s employment for a full year and
providing certification of the salary received for the full year. Eligible
borrowers shall have their ILSFL forgiven at the following schedule, 25%
after one year, 25% after two years (33% of the remaining balance), 50%
after three years (the entire remaining balance).
Iowa Lawyer Loan Forgiveness Pilot Program
2005-06:
Two graduates working toward first year forgiveness of $2,809 principal
& interest.
Established:
2004 for a two year trial period (extended to three years) for three alumni
per year beginning with the class of 2005.
Intent:
Encourage and give support to graduates to pursue their law careers in
Iowa and to contribute to the betterment of Iowa through the provision of
pro bono legal services. To address unmet needs of certain geographical
areas and certain substantive areas of legal practice; and budgets for
organizations providing pro bono legal services in the State of Iowa have
been cut in recent years, while the need for such services has grown.
Description:
The applicant must be engaged in employment performed primarily within
the State of Iowa which requires a law degree and admission to the Iowa
Bar and must also perform a minimum of 40 hours per year of qualifying
pro bono legal services. Additional factors to be considered in evaluating
applications for the Pilot program will include the applicant‟s record of
achievements at the UI College of Law, the applicant‟s financial need, the
191
applicant‟s record of community service, and whether the applicant
intends to engage in employment in a geographical area of Iowa that has a
demonstrable and unmet need for lawyers or in a substantive area of the
law for which there is a demonstrable and unmet need, as determined by
the ILSF. The terms of forgiveness are the same as the terms of the Iowa
Law Foundation Public Interest Loan Forgiveness Program.
C. Student Services
1. Introduction
Student services at the Law School are delivered through a small but experienced professional
and scientific staff (under the University‟s classification system), consisting of a Collegiate
Registrar, Associate Dean for Student Affairs, Director of Financial Aid, Assistant Dean for
Career Services, Director of Career Services, Academic and Career Counselor, and two part-time
Academic Achievement Program staffers (approximate 1 FTE). Since the time of the last Self
Study, this staffing represents an increase of 1.7 FTE in the direct student services area, in
addition to a newly hired, full-time Assistant Dean of Admissions.
Students frequently comment about student affairs staff being approachable and helpful. Given
the staff‟s relatively small size, coordination and communication among the various units is
essential. During the 2006 fall term, student affairs professional staff held a retreat to explore
ways to maximize how we deliver student services, with a consistent mission, message, and
method, seamlessly delivered from recruitment through graduation and beyond.
2. Student Activities and Student Life
The Law School‟s location in a small college city, yet one with rich cultural and intellectual
offerings, helps define the atmosphere at the Law School. Many students appreciate that their
quality of life is high because of this location. Ours is not a commuter school, as a fair
percentage of students live close to the law building. Instead, through extra- and co-curricular
programs and community outreach, a significant proportion of our students are actively engaged
in enriching and invigorating the Law School community. Likewise, Iowa law students are
engaged across campus; members of the ISBA serve on the all-University of Iowa Student
Government (UISG), which includes serving on important student fee allocations committees.
The larger University also offers students access to all the amenities that a large university has to
offer, from the arts to athletics. A significant number of law students take non-law classes during
their second and third years, across a wide range of departments and colleges.
The ISBA, to which every law student belongs, elects an executive board each year.
Representatives are elected from each class, and additional representatives are elected to the
UISG and the Iowa Law School Foundation Board. The ISBA functions as a service
organization, and last year, it sponsored (along with another student group, the Equal Justice
192
Foundation) the largest group of law students (over forty) to go to New Orleans over spring
break. The ISBA philanthropy committee administers the Pro Bono Society, to encourage
community service by law schools. The Boyd Service Award is earned by students who log
between 100 and 200 hours of volunteer service during their law school careers. Award
recipients wear honor cords at graduation and receive recognition seals for their diplomas.
While there is a healthy amount of competition among the law students, many describe the
learning atmosphere as more collaborative than competitive. One law student likened the
dynamics of the student body atmosphere to those of a small town, where it is possible to get to
know many, if not all of one‟s classmates. In addition, the extracurricular groups are
extraordinarily active, offering many activities and events that bring a vibrancy to the Law
School community and offer opportunities for students to connect across a broad range of
interest areas. It is not uncommon for The Docket, the Law School‟s weekly electronic
newsletter, to list 10 or more activities in a week‟s time – speakers, bake sales, prayer meetings,
pro-choice regional conference, clothing drives, and the like. This is the list of currently active
law student organizations:
American Constitution Society
Asian American Law Students Association (AALSA)
Black Law Students Association (BLSA)
Christian Legal Society
Environmental Law Society
Equal Justice Foundation (EJF)
The Federalist Society
Intellectual Property Law Society (IPLS)
International Law Society (ILS)
Iowa Campaign for Human Rights
Iowa Human Trafficking Awareness Project
Iowa Student Bar Association (ISBA)
J. Reuben Clark Law Society
Latino Law Student Association (LLSA)
Law Students for Choice
National Lawyers Guild
National Security & Law Society
Native American Law Students Association (NALSA)
Organization for Women Law Students and Staff (OWLSS)
Outlaws
Phi Alpha Delta (PADS)
3.
Student Focus Groups
Early in the spring 2006 term, the two student members of the Self Study Committee conducted
two focus group discussions on selected topics related to student life. While only about ten
students attended, a rich set of responses was elicited. They encompassed a wide array of topics,
193
from teaching to facilities, student organizations and governance, advising and orientation, and
diversity and discipline. The notes from the meetings appear as Attachment 4-7.
4. Student Participation in Governance
a. Faculty Committees
Almost all policy change in the Law School is initiated in faculty committees, and two students
serve on each committee, with the exceptions of the Faculty Appointments Committee, and the
Peer Review Committee. Interested students submit letters of interest in one or more committees
and then the ISBA President (or co-presidents) select nominees to be approved by the Dean.
While it is occasionally the case that students don‟t participate actively in committee business,
the rule is that students are engaged in the work of all of the committees on which they serve.
Two students serve on the Academic Standards Committee, which has three functions in its
charge: 1) hearing retention cases; 2) serving as the review committee for the disability
accommodations policy; and 3) constituting the panel for academic misconduct cases. Student
members do not participate in retention or disability review cases. They do, however, serve as
the student member and alternate member on the panels constituted for hearing cases of
academic misconduct.
While two students serve on the Admissions Committee, they do not review files. Their role is
limited to matters of policy and recruitment strategies.
The two students who serve on the Student Honors and Awards Committee fully participate in
policy decisions such as the criteria for awards and the addition of awards. They also assist in
identifying candidates for student awards and in encouraging their colleagues to do so. While
they provide preliminary input on particular student nominees‟ suitability for awards, they do not
participate in the final deliberations in order to respect student confidentiality.
b. Student Government
The ISBA is an active force in the Law School community, providing a voice of the students to
the administration, a catalyst for faculty-student interaction outside the classroom, and leadership
in sparking interest in pro bono service by students. See Chapter 2, Section L, and Section F of
this chapter for descriptions of the ISBA Boyd Service Award. The co-presidents currently
meet every other week with the Dean and Dean of Students, and these two deans attend the biweekly ISBA meetings at the ISBA‟s invitation, where they are present to answer questions as
well as to give a report. ISBA committees provide the members with an opportunity to process
student concerns and to pass them along to the administration and to student members of the
faculty committees. One example is the ISBA building committee, which may hear concerns
about parking or lounge facilities, and then insures that the faculty committee is aware of the
issues from the students‟ viewpoint. Members of ISBA also serve on the all-University student
government and often in important leadership roles, such as on the appropriations committee.
194
c. Student Leader Meetings
In her first year, Dean Jones instituted the practice of meeting with leaders of all the student
organizations over lunch at least twice each semester. These meetings give her the opportunity
to share news about the Law School and to get feedback from the students about a wide range of
subjects.
d. Ombudspersons
The Law School‟s Ombudspersons policy and procedure is as follows:
Each year one or two tenured faculty members are selected by the Iowa Student
Bar Association to serve as the Law School ombudspersons. Any problem or
grievance that a student may have concerning another student or faculty member
should be taken to an Ombudsperson. All complaints should be handled in the
strictest confidence, and no student need fear retribution from any faculty
member. The names of the ombudspersons for the 2006-07 academic year will be
posted prominently in the Student Affairs glass case opposite the Administrative
Suite on the second floor.
Any problem or grievance that a student may have concerning another student or
faculty member should be taken to and followed through with only one of the
ombudspersons.
Appendix 2-3 at 19.
Given the informal and confidential nature of the ombudsperson process, no written records are
kept regarding the number and type of cases that are handled. The general types of cases may
include dissatisfaction with a faculty member or interpersonal disputes between students.
The administration is currently reviewing the Law School‟s academic complaint procedures,
including the Ombudspersons process, and is considering whether elaboration of function or
process is necessary, as well as whether there are better ways to inform students of the various
complaint procedures.
5. Student Advising and Mentoring
a. Faculty Advising
For more than ten years, new students have been assigned a faculty advisor at the beginning of
their first semester. These assignments are made at random, although each faculty member‟s
group of advisees is made up of students enrolled in the same first year section - i.e. - they share
the same first year professor with the exception of the LAWR instructor. The function of a
faculty advisor is both actual and symbolic. The faculty advising system is a “back up” to formal
course selection programs and to other established sources of advice and counsel. The first role
195
of a faculty advisor is to extend a warm welcome to our incoming students. Faculty members are
expected to set up a meeting with their advisees within the first few weeks of new students‟
arrival. Some faculty members set up special office hours or an in-office meeting for their
advisees and others take their advisees out to lunch. Either way, this first meeting with students
provides faculty an opportunity to: learn about the students – their interests and concerns;
demonstrate a willingness to serve as a resource for them throughout their study; check in with
them about their first experiences in the Law School; trouble-shoot and problem solve; and pass
on suggestions for study and writing assignments.
Students are not required to see their advisors during the registration cycle, and many do not.
Faculty members report varying degrees of success in establishing an on-going relationship with
their advisees. A fair number of students never meet their faculty advisors and a very significant
majority of students see their advisors only once.
From time to time faculty committees have discussed or considered establishing a faculty
advising system designed to match students with faculty members by areas of interest. Aside
from the not-insignificant administrative work such a system would require, this idea has not
been implemented for a number of reasons. One challenge would be how to allocate fairly the
work of student advising across the full faculty, and another how to avoid the pressure such a
system would place on students to select an area of interest, perhaps prematurely. Currently
students are encouraged to take advantage of an “open door” or to otherwise seek faculty
members who share their interests and who may not be their formal advisors.
b. New Position: Career Advisor and Judicial Clerkship Coordinator
In the fall of 2005, Dean Jones reassigned Amy Liu from the admissions office to provide
academic and career advising and to serve, with Professor Tung Yin, as a judicial clerkship
coordinator. For the first year, the position reported to the Associate Dean for Student Affairs.
Starting in the fall of 2006, the position was moved organizationally to the Career Services office
under the direction of Assistant Dean for Career Services Steve Langerud. Despite the reporting
change, a focus of the position is to help students explore career options and to make curricular
choices to enhance future career opportunities. In this respect, it is a position that bridges the
academic advising and career services functions of student services.
Although she only occupies a 70% time position, Amy Liu‟s effect on student life has been
notable beyond her work as Judicial Clerk Coordinator. Through presentations and one-on-one
conferences, Amy advises students of credit, paid, or volunteer internship/externship
opportunities in government and the public sector. She also works closely with Career Services
staff to advertise various externship and internship opportunities, initially through “The Docket”
(the Law School‟s weekly electronic newsletter) and presently through the Symplicity software.
She guides interested students through the application process for the various positions –
reviewing resumes and cover letters, preparing them for interviews, etc. She has increased
students‟ awareness of the Presidential Management Fellowship (PMF) Program, coordinated the
school‟s nomination and selection process, and guided students through the application process.
The school nominated twelve students in October 2005 – a record number of students for the
196
school – five of whom were selected as PMF semi-finalists, and one of whom received a position
with the Social Security Administration.
c. Other Academic Advising
In addition to the advising done by individual faculty advisors and by Amy Liu, a number of
other efforts are dedicated to curricular advising:
We have continued our practice of holding a large lecture program for first-year students at the
time registration materials are distributed – the first time they pick their own schedules. Students
are given an overview of the curriculum, information about the subjects tested on various bar
examinations, and details about the registration process. Students are encouraged to seek out
faculty advice, including from their individual advisors.
With the introduction in the 2006-07 academic year of a first-year elective in the spring term, we
held a program for first year students in fall 2006 to give a basic overview of the curriculum and
information about the available elective offerings. The chair of the curriculum committee
explained the rationale for the structure of the first year course schedule, and provided insight
about the elective courses. The program was very well attended.
A program called “Avoiding Plagiarism and Effective Legal Writing: Distinguishing the Two
and Understanding the Difference” is mandatory for all first year students as they begin their first
research-based writing projects. The program, presented by the Director of the Writing Resource
Center and the Dean of Student Affairs, combines instruction on the nuances of citation form as
well as how to avoid the pitfalls of unintentional plagiarism. The hoped-for effect, of course, is
to reduce the incidence of plagiarism, and there is some sense that the program has done so.
In the 2005-06 year, special faculty office hours were arranged with a core group of faculty
members organized by curricular emphasis. Students were encouraged to see Professor X, for
example, if they were interested in corporate practice and wanted guidance on course selection to
enhance their preparedness for that career choice. Students‟ usage of the special office hours
was small, and we are suspending the practice while we consider other curriculum advisor
options.
The 2005-06 Upper Division Curriculum committee, under the direction of Professor Ann Estin,
developed a set of curricular materials designed to inform students about clusters of course
subjects that are related to areas of legal practice. Efforts are underway to put these and other
curricular advising materials and course selection advice on the college‟s web site.
At critical times of the year, the Dean of Students and Collegiate Registrar spend substantial time
with individual students who seek them out for curricular, career, or study skills guidance. The
Dean of Student Affairs serves as the joint degree advisor for the approximately thirty to forty
law students who are enrolled each semester in joint degrees programs, and counsels students
and prospective students who are considering joint degrees.
197
d. Peer Mentoring Program
Since the time of the last Self Study, First Year at Iowa (FYI) has been created; it is coordinated
by the Academic Achievement Program (AAP). FYI is a program staffed by a group of upperclass students who serve two critical functions: assisting during the new student orientation
program, and mentoring for the first year students throughout the year. More than twenty
students, primarily L2s, are selected to participate every year.
In the 2006-07 academic year, the FYI mentorship program has twenty-eight upper-class
students who have volunteered to mentor twenty-four groups of between eight and ten 1Ls.
Changes have been made to the program this year to maximize the value of the experience for 1L
mentees. Groups are being encouraged to meet in person at least once a month, and to maintain
open lines of communication at all times. The goal is to provide 1Ls with an additional support
network and a trusted upper-class student from whom they can seek advice, while also providing
a mechanism to channel feedback from 1Ls to the AAP via the mentors.
In addition, more emphasis is placed on enhancing the content and support given to upper-class
mentors. Mentors meet on a monthly basis with the AAP director for formal training, to discuss
the status of their mentorship groups, and to share ideas. Mentor training is provided by
professionals from University Counseling Service on such topics as leadership techniques,
diversity issues, and crisis recognition. It is hoped that this added content will provide both longterm benefits in the mentor‟s professional life and short-term benefits in his or her mentorship of
1Ls.
e. Future Academic Advising
1. Student Survey
In the spring of 2006, the Curriculum Committee surveyed upper class students on two subjects:
student advising and skills training. We used a commercial on-line survey instrument and the
response of 216 upper class students was heartening. Three questions targeted information about
student advising.
The first question asked was to whom students have gone for “help in selecting your law
courses.” While the question technically did not ask students about sources of curricular advice,
as contrasted with “course selection,” it is abundantly clear that other students are the largest
source of information (over 80% response). In descending order the responses were:
Other students
Collegiate registrar
Other faculty
Small section prof
None
Other
80%
26%
20%
16%
13%
13%
(29 gave explicit answers, including practicing and other
lawyers, alums, family members, descriptions of courses and
grade reports, future employers)
198
Assigned advisor
Dean of students and
other staff
11%
11%
The second question was: “Please tell us about your experience setting your second and thirdyear schedules. Which of the following factors have been important to you when preparing your
schedule?” The responses:
Prof teaching the
course
When the course
meets
Advice from current
and former students
Preparing for the bar
exam
Specializing in area
of law
Achieving a broadbased education
Advice from
faculty/staff
Other
92%
81%
77%
52%
51%
40%
20%
11%
(24 gave explicit answers, including interest; scheduling or
type of exam; mechanics of scheduling; grades given in the
past; difficulty of class)
The third advising question was: “What additional resources would you have found helpful in
planning your second-and third-year schedules?” The responses:
Online advice in the
form of a “virtual
advisor” with
selected profs giving
guidance
Online advice in
form of guides to
areas of the
curriculum
Additional printed
material in
mailboxes
49%
47%
42%
199
Group panels or
presentations with
faculty and alum
Special office hours
Other
30%
24%
20%
(39 gave explicit answers, including practicing lawyers; info
about course content, exam and course expectations; info
about courses needed for certain careers; info about courses
expected to be offered in the future semesters; anonymous,
online info by other students; more options for courses)
2. Student Services Committee
All of the Law School‟s advising activities, along with the student survey information, is
currently being considered by the Student Services Committee in response to its charge to
“review the curriculum advisement program currently provided to students, including
individualized guidance on course selection, sequencing, and grouping, paying particular
attention to Interpretation 303-2 of the ABA Standards.”
f. Bar Admission
The Admissions Committee screens applications for applicants who disclose criminal history or
disciplinary proceedings. These applicants are advised that their history may affect their
admission to the bar and they should contact bar authorities with questions. Additionally, all new
students attend a mandatory one-week orientation program that includes a session on bar
application and admission, including character and fitness. Students are directed at this session
and in written materials to various web sites and other sources to determine the various states‟
requirements regarding student registration, subjects tested on the bar examination, deadlines,
and fitness evaluations. Career Services follows through with related information. Additionally,
the Law School‟s web site lists links to the National Conference of Bar Examiners, the ABA
Directory of State Bar Admissions Offices, among other sites for general information on bar
admission.
6. Orientation Program
The Law School‟s one-week new student orientation program is now fourteen years old, having
been approved by the faculty in 1992 for a two-year trial period, and made permanent in 1996. It
introduces new students to three aspects of law student life: the academic, the professional, and
the social/extracurricular. Its format has remained more or less the same since its inception.
One significant change in the academic component occurred in 2000, when the non-credit course
component of orientation was replaced by a one-credit, pass-fail course “Introduction to Law and
Legal Reasoning.” This course replaced the one-credit course “Legal Reasoning” that, until that
time, had been taught in the first third of the first term. It is taught by tenured professors in
three, sixty-student sections. The academic component also includes large-lecture programs that
200
introduce students to the available academic support services, including the Academic
Achievement Program, the Writing Center and information technology services. A panel of first
year teachers is featured in a program on the day before regular classes begin, in order to provide
insight on making the transition to law study.
The professional theme of the orientation program begins with the opening session that includes
welcoming addresses by a member of the Iowa Supreme Court and the president of the Iowa
State Bar Association. Another large group program stresses the importance of diversity in the
legal profession. A member of the Iowa Board of Law Examiners is featured in another session,
which has as its emphasis fitness and character inquiries of admission to the bar. This program
also introduces students to law student conduct codes and the importance of open and respectful
discussion in class and out of class.
The social/extracurricular component is designed to acquaint students with each other and with
the vibrant out-of-class life of the Law School community. Picnics, ice cream socials, lunches,
and cookie parties encourage students to stay in the building and socialize, as well as to discuss
their classes. A student activities fair to which all student co- and extracurricular groups are
invited gives new students the opportunity to sign up for groups that share their interests, and
gives them a way to meet upper class students who share those interests.
The orientation program includes a barbeque hosted for new minority students by the minority
student groups, and it is subsidized by the Law School. It is held at the campus‟s African
American Cultural Center, which is conveniently located across the street from the Law School.
In 2006, at the request of upper class students, a separate two-hour orientation session for
minority students was held on the second Sunday. The first hour featured a panel of faculty
members invited by upper class minority students to give guidance on successful law study. In
the second hour, student panelists shared the lessons they learned as law students in pursuing
academic success, as well as their personal experiences on how to engage the culture in Iowa
constructively, both in and outside of the classroom. Finally, in response to questions posed by
first-year students, the panelists also discussed ways to approach and contribute positively to
topics that may especially affect minority groups in class. This program was well received and
was seen as welcoming by the new students. It was also perceived as demonstrating the
University‟s commitment to diversity. Suggestions for improvement were noted for next year.
Students have uniformly reacted to the full-week orientation program positively. They
appreciate the opportunity to commence their formal study of law with a survey course on law
and legal method, and with their first test at the end of the week graded on a pass-fail basis. A
significant number of students have requested that more explicit instruction on legal methods,
such as reading cases, taking notes, and reviewing, be given, and the Introduction to Law
instructors have responded to that feedback. Students also value the opportunities to socialize
with their peers, and routinely request that more time be devoted to meeting each other. Another
common comment is that the week is too heavily scheduled, not leaving students enough “down
time” to get settled or to absorb the vast amount of material presented.
A schedule of the 2006-07 Orientation Week program is provided in Appendix 4-3.
201
7. Retention
Our admissions process apparently admits well qualified candidates given our high retention
statistics. Very few students have faced academic difficulties severe enough to warrant coming
before the law school‟s Academic Standards and Review Committee. As the following table
shows, in the fourteen years between 1992 and 2006, 45 students have been brought under the
retention policy for failing to meet the minimum grade point average after the second
semester. (Those forty-five students represent a total of forty-nine cases, as three students
were brought up under the policy more than once.) Since the last Self Study, only fourteen
students have fallen into retention status. Forty-one of the forty-five students petitioned and
were retained by the faculty committee, and of those forty-one, three voluntarily withdrew from
law school and thirty-two eventually graduated.
In 2005 and 2006, two additional students were called before the retention committee for failing
to meet the "reasonable progress" standards of the retention policy added in 2005. These
standards require successfully completing at least 10 credit hours in a semester or completing the
first year curriculum within 24 months of matriculation. One of these students is currently
enrolled and the other withdrew because of health reasons.
Since the institution of the Law School's formal Academic Achievement Program (AAP) in
1999, the retention statistics have seemed to improve on all measures. It is a common practice
for the committee to refer retained students to work with the AAP.
TABLE 4-11 STUDENTS’ RETENTION STATUS 1992-2006
YEAR
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
TOTAL
2005
2006
TOTAL
TOTAL
2
11
7
0
6
3
2
2
4
3
2
2
1
45
1
1
47
RETAINED
2
10
4
0
6
3
2
2
4
3
2
2
1
41
1
1
43
202
GRADUATED
1
10
4
0
4
2
1 (1 withdrew)
1
2 (1 withdrew)
3
2
2
0 (1 withdrew)
32
enrolled
withdrew
N/A
8. Academic Achievement Program
a. Introduction
In 1998, after much discussion in preceding years, the faculty approved the establishment of the
AAP at the Law School. This program would benefit all students, not merely those predicted to
have trouble based upon their numerical indicators or even those who actually had trouble in
their law school studies. Marty Peters, Ph.D., whose training is in learning theory and
counseling, and who had many years of experience in pioneering an academic support program
at the University of Florida, was hired as director at the beginning of the 1999-2000 academic
year. The faculty required that the program be reviewed in 2002. The reviewing committee
unanimously recommended that the program be continued, a decision that was approved by the
faculty in March 2002. The Dean determined that the program should be reviewed again with
the Law School‟s other academic and student services programs in its 2006 Self Study. The
following is an up-to-date description of the AAP as it has evolved since its review in 2002.
b. Development and Overview of the Academic Achievement Program
At its beginning the goals for the AAP were identified as: 1) administering a fall lecture series;
2) consulting on the orientation program; 3) counseling students with poor performance on first
semester exams; 4) working with faculty members in “diagnosing academic and methodological
deficiencies of students in academic difficulty;” 5) working with individual students referred to
the program by legal methods or small section instructors; 6) developing individualized
academic support plans for students after their first semester; 7) serving as a resource to
instructors interested in providing individualized academic support; and 8) consulting with upper
class students regarding on-going academic issues. It was also noted that the program should
seek to assist all students, not just those in difficulty. The program has met those goals and has
improved its outreach and delivery of services. The program‟s activities fall into five categories:
1. Group Programming
2. Spring-term small group
3. One-on-one work on academic performance issues including crisis intervention
and referral
4. Outreach to current and prospective students
5. Collaboration with faculty
1. Group Programming
These group programs help students make the transition from their undergraduate and graduate
learning methods to law study. The programs focus on study strategies and exam taking skills.
The schedule for Fall 2005, Spring and Summer 2006 (the last full year of offerings) was:
203
August 22
September 1
September 6
September
13
September
26
October 4
October 11
October 27
November 1
November 8
November
15
January 20
January 25
January 26
January 26
January 27
February 8
February 17
March 1
March 22
April 5
April 6
April 12
Making the Transition to Law Study: A Panel of 1st Year Professors
Exam Reviews for “Intro to Law & Legal Reasoning”
Reading Like a Lawyer
Professor Buzuvis and Dr. Peters
Organizing Methods
Dr. Peters
Forming & Using Study Groups Effectively
Professor Gaulding and Dr. Peters
Reading Cases in Preparation for an Exam
Professor Matsumoto (Part 1 of II)
Applying Cases to Exam Writing
Professor Matsumoto (Part II of II)
Outlining for Exams
Professor Carlson
Applying Outlines & Checklists to Exam Questions
Dean McGuire
Preparing for Multiple Choice Exams
Professor Hines
Exam Techniques
Dr. Peters
Exam Reviews: Looking Back to Plan Ahead
Professor VanderVelde
Professor Hovenkamp
Professor Burton
Professor Buzuvis
Professor Love
Writing Complex Papers
Dr. Nancy Jones & Dr. Mary Peters
Moving from Memos to Briefs
Professor Liebig
Stress Management for Law School & Bar Preparation
Dr. Peters
Preparing for Being a 2L
Panel of Students
Connecting Study and Writing Tasks to Exam Writing
Dean McGuire
Bar Exam Wisdom: Starting with Effective Strategies
Professor Bauer, Professor Yin, and Alumni who recently passed a Bar
Exam
Approaching a Problem with the Commerce Clause
Professor Matsumoto
204
May 15
May 25
June 7
June 13
TBA, July
Learning Principles Applied to Law Study
Reading Like a Lawyer
Organizing: Many Methods – One Goal
Exam Techniques
What Comes Next? A Panel of Current Law Students
2. Spring-term Small Group
The Art of Advocacy has been a voluntary, space-limited, six week series that starts at the end of
January and runs until spring break. Students identified as at-risk receive an invitation to this
program from the Dean of Student Affairs; however, this program is open to all first-year
students. This program typically serves about twenty students. It focuses on basic study skills
development. The schedule for the spring 2006 term was:
Week of January 30
Week of February 6
Week of February 13
Week of February 20
Week of February 27
Week of March 6
Building a Stronger Foundation:
Six Small Steps to Better Comprehension
Finding Your Most Effective Learning Strategies
with Psychological Type Theory
Learning from Exam Answers:
What Makes an Answer Good, Better, or Best?
Writing an Exam Question:
Creating Hypotheticals to Test Content and Skills
Grading an Exam Answer
Organizing for the Big Picture and the Details
3. Individual Work with Students
The AAP director makes significant contributions to the delivery of student services at the Law
School. While students are encouraged to meet with their faculty instructors, often students are
embarrassed and do not feel comfortable discussing personal or academic issues with their
professors and prefer to discuss such issues with the AAP director or dean of students.
Through the 2005-06 year, Dr. Peters, the AAP director, typically worked with more than 100
students each year and followed-up with a number of students informally. During a semester,
the AAP director met with individual students 1-15 times, with the average number of meetings
being 3-4 and the usual appointment time being one hour.
Students schedule individual meetings to work on a variety of challenges presented by their
academic studies from study methods to projects and exams, as well as learning disabilities.
Some students require diagnostic work to develop intervention strategies. Dr. Peters was also in
a unique position to help identify students who needed professional help coping with such
problems as clinical depression, substance abuse, or stressors that require more than short-term
intervention. Diagnosing when and to whom to refer students with continuing emotional issues
is an important function served by the AAP director.
205
4. Outreach to Current and Prospective Students
The AAP director has been involved in the peer support feature of the FYI program, which
provides assistance to new students at Orientation, peer mentoring throughout the first year, and
tours to prospective students. During the spring semester, AAP holds an open house to promote
its spring programs and the Art of Advocacy program. It also hosts a Health Fair to help
students kick off the second semester in positive and active ways and to confront the
discouragement students often feel following the receipt of their fall grades. Furthermore, the
AAP director works with law student organizations upon request and participates in programs
organized by the Admissions Office.
5. Collaboration with Faculty
The AAP director works in collaboration with faculty members on group programming and
individual student needs, so that together they can provide greater academic support to students.
One common example of this type of collaboration is exam reviews.
c. Current Status and Future of the Program
1. Current Status
Dr. Peters, the AAP director since 1999, left the position in the summer of 2006. In 2002, when
the faculty decided to continue this program beyond the trial period, Dean Hines noted that the
2006 Self Study process would be the next opportunity to consider how the AAP program should
meet its obligation “to provide the academic support necessary to assure each student a
satisfactory opportunity to complete the program, graduate and become a member of the legal
profession.”
In the summer of 2006, Dean Jones decided to fill the director position temporarily until the
review could be conducted. The Law School hired two alumni to fill the positions of director
and assistant director. The Academic Achievement Director for 2006-07 is Brian Farrell, who
graduated in 1998 with distinction. Because Brian is currently completing his Ph.D. at the
National University of Ireland, Galway, he could commit only 75% of his time to employment
here. Therefore, we also hired Chace Ramey, a 2004 graduate, also with distinction. Chace
devotes 33% time to the Academic Achievement Program while he pursues a graduate degree at
the College of Education.
Many faculty members believe that a permanent AAP director should be law trained. Other
characteristics also important when considering the replacement include the ability to
complement and not duplicate faculty members‟ skills and the ability to empathize with students
who struggle to achieve academically. Other skills that should be considered in making a new
hire include: Diagnostic Skills; General Counseling Skills; and Effective Teaching Skills.
206
2. Future of the Program
(a) The Strategic Plan states: “Evaluate the College‟s Academic Achievement
Program in light of revisions to the first year curriculum, and make programmatic and staffing
changes as appropriate, consistent with the ABA requirement to provide academic support.”
Goal 1, Theme 2, #3. After six years of the program‟s providing programmatic and counseling
support, this statement appears to reflect an ambivalence, perhaps a division, among the faculty
about the need for a designated and professionally staffed Academic Achievement Program.
While this ambivalence may be the result of a lack of understanding about the function of such a
program, it also probably reflects a difference of philosophy about the need for explicit academic
support outside of the traditional teaching role of faculty members. It may also reflect two other
concerns: the wisdom of dedicating financial resources to such a program in lean fiscal times,
and a curiosity about whether the new LAWR program and faculty will serve an academic
support function, making the AAP redundant.
(b) Student Services Committee Recommendation for Continuation of Program.
Among the charges to the Student Services faculty committee in the 2005-06 year was the
assignment to “monitor the Academic Achievement Program.” The committee was provided
with an extensive report on the program‟s activities since March 2002 when the faculty voted to
continue the program beyond its pilot period. At its January 19, 2006 meeting, the committee
recommended to the Dean that the program be continued, via the appointment of a full-time
interim AAP director, for a period of up to two years. Furthermore, the committee recommended
that the AAP should remain in place and fully active until the faculty has the opportunity to do
another full review taking into account substantial input from the student body during the spring
of the 2006-07 academic year. The text of the committee‟s full report and recommendation
appears at the end of this chapter as Attachment 4-8.
(c) Student Services Committee oversight and review, 2006-07. At the request of
Dean Jones, the Student Services Committee will evaluate the Academic Achievement Program
during the 2006-07 year. This will be done by consulting with both students and faculty
members, after enough time has elapsed to permit some assessment of the effect of the new
LAWR program on the need for and provision of academic support. The tentative plan is for
students to be surveyed late in the spring semester, 2007, and for the faculty to discuss the
program shortly after the results of the survey are available. If the upshot of that process is that a
new AAP director should be sought, the search would begin in the fall semester 2007. Of
course, this timetable remains tentative and dependent upon the Law School‟s ability to staff the
program beyond the spring semester of 2007, as well as other variables.
9. Student Discipline
The Law School‟s student discipline process is characterized by a bifurcation between academic
and non academic misconduct.
207
a. Academic Misconduct
Adopted in the 1998-99 academic year, the procedures applicable to academic misconduct are
elaborate and detailed, in sharp contrast to the non-academic misconduct procedures.
A key feature of the academic misconduct procedures is a two-track process. A case may be
handled by the faculty member in whose course or program the alleged misconduct occurred, at
his or her choosing, but only if the expected punishment is no more severe than lowering of a
grade or dis-enrollment from the course. Alternatively, a faculty member may refer the case to a
Panel of two faculty members and a student (and alternate student) member.
Most cases of academic misconduct in recent years have been handled by a panel. Some concern
has been expressed by faculty members who have served on the panels that the cases have
required excessive amounts of time, especially during the summer for cases initiated at the end of
the spring term. Another concern about the new procedures is an apparent discrepancy in the
outcomes of cases between those handled by faculty members and those referred to panels, with
apparently more severe punishments awarded in cases handled by panels. While this
discrepancy may be attributable to the structure of the process (more serious cases must be
referred to a panel), it has been suggested that the faculty should examine the discrepancy and
consider whether a revision of the policy is in order.
b. Non-academic Misconduct
The Law School‟s non-academic misconduct policy and procedures are set in the context of the
overall University‟s Code of Student Life (CSL). There is some duplication in the substantive
offenses contained in both the Law School‟s misconduct code and the CSL, and the Office of
Vice President of Student Services (VPSS) has primary jurisdiction of cases of non-academic
student misconduct covered in the CSL.
The most common non-academic misconduct case in recent years has been misrepresentation on
the Law School application. Our College is among the most demanding in asking students to
reveal criminal histories, including expunged offenses, juvenile matters, and, starting in 2005,
traffic offenses (other than speeding). New students are given an opportunity to amend their
applications during orientation to report previously undisclosed criminal history. For an
explanation of the process and rationale, see Linda McGuire, Lawyering or Lying? When Law
School Applicants Hide Their Criminal Histories and Other Misconduct, 45 TEX. L. REV. 709
(2004). Between 20 and 40 students each year amend their applications without triggering a
misconduct case. One recent case of misrepresentation resulted in a misconduct dismissal,
however, when it was discovered that a student forged a letter of recommendation. Similarly,
misconduct proceedings are commenced against students who fail to take advantage of the
amendment process. Finally, each year recent graduates report to the Law School that the bar
authorities in the states in which they are applying for admission require them to report matters
to us that predated their admission but that were not included on their applications. We have
disposed of these cases by permitting a retroactive application amendment, since all of the
matters have been minor.
208
c. Summary of All Misconduct Cases 1999-2005
A thumbnail description of each misconduct case, written to protect the student‟s identity, is
posted at the conclusion of the case and these descriptions are kept on file at the library reference
desk. The following table reports the cases handled since 1999:
TABLE 4-12 MISCONDUCT CASES 1999-2005
Calendar Year
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Academic Misconduct
Ø
Plagiarism (1)
Ø
Plagiarism (4)
Plagiarism (4)
Cheating/Misrepresentation (2)
Plagiarism (4)
Attempted
cheating/Misrepresentation (1)
Cheating/Misrepresentation (1)
Plagiarism (2)
Plagiarism (1)
Non-Academic Misconduct
Application Misrepresentation (1)
Ø
Ø
Ø
Admissions Misrepresentation (1)
Other Misrepresentation (3)
D. Career Services/Placement/Outputs
1. Accomplishments 2005-06
In the fall of 2005, the Law School employed a consultant to provide an assessment of the Career
Services‟ office‟s strengths and challenges (see below). In turn, Dean Jones implemented a
number of changes in the 2005-06 year:
Created a 3/4-time position “Career Advisor and Judicial Clerkship Coordinator” in fall
2005. Amy Liu coordinates the clerkship program with Professor Tung Yin, and has
been very active in generating interest among our students for summer externship
programs, especially for rising second year students.
Participated in “OSCAR,” the on-line application process for federal judicial clerkship
applications, and the administration helped by “bundling” and mailing Iowa students‟
applications.
209
Adopted “Symplicity,” a comprehensive career services software program that provides
management for on-campus interviewing (OCI), student counseling, research and job
search strategies.
Used the Pomerantz Career Center for “early bird” OCI and career counseling
workshops, August 9-18, 2006. As the law building becomes increasingly cramped for
space, we have been unable to accommodate with any ease or grace upwards of 180 OCI
employers each year. Our OCI process, then, was becoming increasingly late, making
our students less competitive. The Pomerantz Center is beautifully designed both for
interviewing and workshops. “Early bird” potentially provides the additional advantage
of giving students who don‟t get their jobs through OCI earlier notice so they can devise
alternative strategies.
Deployment of 1/4 of the Assistant Dean for External Relations‟ time for career services
support was recommended by the Consultant, including a fall “marketing” trip to
Chicago to cultivate interest for Iowa grads among small and medium sized firms, and for
making matches for Partner for a Day.
Moved the Career Services Offices to a suite of offices previously occupied by
Admissions, which in turn gave CSO the opportunity to cull and review the CSO library
and to improve student traffic flow and scheduling of appointments
2. Outcomes
a. Bar Passage
Iowa Graduates fare better on the Iowa bar exam than do graduates from other law schools,
including Drake and Creighton.
210
Date of
Exam
Jul-00
Feb-01
Jul-01
Feb-02
Jul-02
Feb-03
Jul-03
Feb-04
Jul-04
Feb-05
Jul-05
Feb-06
Jul-06
Date
TABLE 4-13 IOWA BAR EXAM PASS RATES
Total and U of I 2000-2005
Total
UI Grads
Total Passing UI Grads
Taking
Taking
(1st x)
Passing
st
Exam (1 x) Exam
% (n)
(1st x) % (n)
(1st x)
167
66
N/A
87 (53)
72
27
85 (45)
82 (18)
173
49
N/A
90 (38)
65
24
N/A
76 (13)
178
66
92 (164)
91 (54)
93
26
74 (69)
223
77
88 (198)
90 (69)
102
31
90 (61)
96 (22)
241
74
86 (190)
93 (69)
102
34
87 (54)
68 (23)
210
78
86 (180)
94 (73)
105
14
81 (60)
100 (8)
231
72
90 (207)
94 (66)
UI Grads
Repeat
Takers/
Passed
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
7/0
5/2
2/1
TABLE 4-14 ILLINOIS BAR EXAM PASS RATES
2004-2006
Total
UI Grads
Total
UI Grads
UI Grads
Taking
Taking
Passing
Passing
Repeat
Exam (1st x) Exam
(1st x)
(1st x) % (n) Takers/
(1st x)
%
Passed
2,860
36
87
92 (33)
4/1
Jul-06
Feb-06
Jul-05
2,813
53
86
Feb-05
N/A
10
80
Jul-04
N/A
43
86
*Feb-04
N/A
19
78
*Overall Iowa pass rate, 1st x and repeat = 58%
85 (41)
60 (6)
95 (41)
N/A
5/3
3/2
5/2
N/A
Anywhere from 61-80% of our graduates have taken jobs out-of-state in the past six years. Not
all states report to our school the pass rate of our graduates, and therefore the data is spotty.
Illinois is the state, after Iowa, that attracts a large number of Iowa alumni. Until recently we
have not had the data or staff resources to systematically study bar passage rates in other states.
However, given how such information may assist us in doing a better job of curricular advising
for those students planning to leave Iowa, we are now collecting it more systematically.
211
b. Graduation with Distinction
New “graduation with distinction” standards went into effect with the class that started in 1998.
GPA of 3.6 and higher = Highest Distinction
Graduating in the top 12.5% = High Distinction
Graduating in the top 37.5% = Distinction
TABLE 4-15 GRADUATION WITH HONORS 2001-06
Year Highest
High
Distinction
Distinction Distinction
2006 9
17
52
2005 8
25
63
2004 5
25
56
2003 4
25
61
2002 9
20
57
2001 4
23
54
c. Job Placement, Salary, Types of Employment
Overall, Iowa students enjoy a successful job placement rate, both in and out of state, across a
wide range of employment types and a wide range of salaries. Unfortunately, our relatively high
in-state employment results in a depressed median starting salary for graduating classes.
212
Percentage
employed
(9 months after
Graduation)
Percent
unemployed*
Unemployed
and seeking
employment
Unemployed
and not seeking
employment
Seeking
Advanced
Degree
Employed
Unknown
Employment
Status
# Reporting
# in Class
Graduating
Class
TABLE 4-16 EMPLOYMENT STATISTICS
1999-2005
1999 203
201
2
4
193
4
1
1%
99%
2000 221
221
0
9
219
2
0
0%
100%
2001 200
200
0
6
188
4
2
1%
99%
2002 225
225
0
11
201
7
6
3%
97%
2003 231
231
0
13
216
0
2
1%
99%
2004 229
229
0
11
210
5
3
1%
99%
2005 262
260
2
10
233
15
2
1%
99%
*Included in the unemployed category are graduates who are unemployed and not actively
seeking employment, so they are not counted in the actual unemployed percentage.
TABLE 4-17 SALARY DATA
1999-2005
Graduation Median Median Median
Year
In-State Out-of-State
1999
42,900 36,000 65,000
2000
42,000 38,000 50,000
2001
50,000 42,000 70,000
2002
49,000 42,000 80,000
2003
50,000 44,500 52,000
2004
55,000 45,000 80,500
2005
55,000 41,500 79,000
Class
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
TABLE 4-18 TYPES OF EMPLOYMENT 1999-2005
Private
Judicial
Business
Government Public
Practice
Clerkships
Interest
103 (53%)
30 (16%)
30 (16%) 16 (8%)
6 (3%)
121 (58%)
34 (16%)
28 (13%) 17 (8%)
2 (1%)
115 (62%)
20 (11%)
16 (9%)
25 (14%)
7 (4%)
118 (62%)
24 (13%)
29 (15%) 13 (7%)
5 (3%)
118 (56%)
28 (13%)
20 (10%) 31 (15%)
10 (5%)
124 (61%)
17 (8%)
31 (15%) 15 (7%)
6 (3%)
133 (57%)
22 (9%)
29 (13%) 21 (9%)
13 (6%)
213
Academic
6 (3%)
5 (2%)
2 (1%)
3 (2%)
3 (1%)
3 (1%)
5 (2%)
TABLE 4-19 PERCENTAGE EMPLOYED IN-STATE/OUT OF STATE
1999-2005
Year
Employed
Employed
In-State
Out-of-State
1999
32%
68%
2000
32%
68%
2001
20%
80%
2002
34%
66%
2003
31%
69%
2004
39%
61%
2005
31%
69%
3. Career Services Operation
a. Consultant‟s Review
The current Self Study takes place in a time of significant change for the Office of Career
Services (OCS). Dean Carolyn Jones commissioned an external review to establish the current
state of career services at the Iowa Law School and support the Strategic Plan adopted by the
faculty on May 7, 2006.
A consultant, Abbie Willard of the University of Chicago, visited campus to review the strengths
and challenges of the current career services operation. She met with faculty, staff, alumni and
students to gather information about career services.
Ms. Willard reported in her findings that the current staff was seen by students as accessible,
caring, loyal, dedicated and helpful. The office communicates frequently by email with students
that are perceived by students as well intentioned and helpful. The number of informational
programs provided was viewed as more than adequate.
Challenges to the operation fell into three categories: Leadership to carry the career service
function beyond the well-established but outdated status quo; expanded resources to support the
student job search and career decision-making functions; and increased interaction and
credibility with other stake holders in the Law School.
She recommended: Changing the OCS staffing allocation, structure, and duties; shifting the
philosophical emphasis of OCS from resume advising and individual student job search
responsibility to career counseling, employer cultivation, and job information dissemination;
developing a three-year strategic plan for the OCS; reconfiguring the space allocated for the
OCS; focusing on building support from internal constituencies through a variety of initiatives;
contacting all students early and often; developing a broader and more active alumni base
available for OCS initiatives; developing support for students with public interest or public
service career goals; and examining the desirability of Law School policies that have a
disproportional and unintended negative affect on the Iowa students‟ career alternatives.
214
b. Assistant Dean Position Created
Supported by the consultant‟s report, a new senior leadership position, Assistant Dean for Career
Services, was developed to: initiate strategic thinking and planning; develop and implement
creative and comprehensive career services programs; provide high level career counseling to
students and alumni; engage alumni to support employment, experiential learning, and
fundraising; and to expand and increase the national profile of the Law School among
employers.
The candidate recruited and hired as the new Assistant Dean for Career Services, Steve
Langerud, previously served as the Dean of Experiential Education at Grinnell College, a highly
selective, national liberal arts college.
By hiring Mr. Langerud the Law School clearly stepped beyond the traditional model of law
school placement to identify a candidate that has integrated career services experience built on
experiential learning, fundraising, counseling, and strategic planning with a national institution
supporting multi-potentialed students and alumni with a strong social commitment ethos
consistent with the Iowa Law School.
It is the desire of the College to better understand our students, develop and implement career
programs consistent with the interests of students, provide congruent messaging with the
admissions operation, expand the national market for University of Iowa graduates, and actively
engage alumni in the life of the Law School to increase opportunities for current students and to
facilitate philanthropy.
c. Other Staffing and Physical Facility
The OCS has been understaffed since even before the time of the last Self Study. The area most
affected by this shortage has been career development activities, in particular, programming and
individual counseling. The consultant who visited campus in the fall of 2005 recommended that
staff be meeting with individual students early and often, and learn of or help them develop their
interests, counsel them on job search strategies, and keep track of their progress toward a career.
Such ambitious goals require more professional staff.
The current staff consists of: Assistant Dean Steve Langerud; Director of Career Services Karen
Klouda; Judicial Clerkships Coordinator Amy Liu; Career Services Assistant Craig Spitzer; and
temporary Secretary Cindy Lohman. The positions of assistant dean and clerkships coordinator
are new to the operation.
Current physical space for the operation is inadequate. Workspace for staff and students is not
confidential or appropriate for the required projects.
215
The purchase of the employment and recruiting software package, Symplicity, has been a major
commitment and improvement to the infrastructure of the operation. First implemented in the
fall of 2006, this program will improve communication with students and employers.
As of November 2006, the Law School will add a video-conferencing system, LawConnect, to
assist students who want to interview with non-visiting employers. In addition, the system will
promote alumni speakers for career sessions and guest speakers for classes.
d. Job Search Support
1. On Campus Interviewing
The most visible face of the OCS is on-campus interviewing (OCI). The office has had an
adequate but declining program that will be reviewed during the next year. The drop-off from
2001/02-2002/03 appears attributable to both a downward turn in the economy and from a
different National Association of Law Placement (NALP) reporting mechanism for how to count
law firms who visit.
TABLE 4-20 ON CAMPUS INTERVIEWING ACTIVITY
1999-2005
Academic Year
Number of
Employers
1999-00
263
2000-01
220
2001-02
243
2002-03
183
2003-04
186
2004-05
190
2005-06
176
Overall the Iowa Law School fares better than the national percentage in terms of OCI being a
job source for students.
TABLE 4-21 OCI AS JOB SOURCE
(Fall Only) 1999-2005
Academic Iowa % (n) National %
Year
1999
32.3 (60)
22.8
2000
24.8 (52)
23.9
2001
27.8 (52)
27.6
2002
31.8 (64)
25.4
2003
26.4 (57)
23.2
2004
26 (55)
21.6
2005
24.4 (54)
20.6
216
Early bird interview week. With the start of the 2006-07 academic year, the Law School used
the Pomerantz Career Center, on the east campus, to host an intensive “early bird” week of oncampus interviewing during the week before classes started. This space is designed specifically
for on-campus interviewing and is significantly better than the space within the Law School.
The advantages of the “early bird” week include better logistical support of employers and
students; improved calendaring to meet the needs of employers and provide students with better
access to jobs; and reduced disruption to classes and other fall activities.
Pre-screening by on-campus interviewers. In the 2004-05 academic year, the Student Services
committee considered whether to change the Law School‟s policy regarding pre-screening of
students who participate in on-campus interviewing. The policy permits employers to advertise
their preferred criteria (such as class rank) and to counsel students to consider those criteria as
they sign up, but not to prohibit students who do not meet the criteria to interview. The
Committee decided by consensus not to recommend a change in the Law School‟s practice. It
did so after extensive research which revealed, in part, the following facts:
1. With very few exceptions, the highest ranked law schools do not permit pre-screening
(only two of the Top 15 schools permit it).
2. While employers would apparently prefer pre-screening, there was no evidence that
pre-screening would increase the number of employers conducting on-campus interviews. The
decisions to come to campus are affected by many other factors.
3. Our students have access to a number of Top 250 law firms through job fairs and
resume collection (see below), both of which permit pre-screening.
4. Iowa fares well among the eleven midwestern USNWR Top 50 law schools in
attracting the Top 250 law firms. While we place 7th in overall ranking, we place 5th behind 4
higher-ranked schools in attracting Top 250 law firms, behind Michigan, Chicago, Northwestern
and Notre Dame, ahead of two higher ranked schools, Minnesota and Washington/St. Louis, and
ahead of four lower-ranked schools, Illinois, Wisconsin, Indiana/Bloomington, and Ohio State.
All four schools with higher Top 250 OCI numbers prohibit pre-screening, and five of the six
schools with lower OCI numbers allow pre-screening.
5. Anecdotal information indicates that students with high grades who fail to obtain an
interview slot through the existing system are often contacted off of the waiting list and
interviewed by employers after the allotted time.
6. Pre-screening may reinforce student perception that Career Services are directed
towards students at the top of the class.
We will again review the Law School‟s policy regarding pre-screening as part of the strategies
for 2007, under the direction of the new Assistant Dean (see Section 2.g below).
217
2. Resume Collections and Referrals
While Career Services strongly encourages potential employers to come on campus to conduct
their interviewing, a visit to campus is not feasible for everyone. Therefore employers who
choose not to participate in OCI are given an option to be added to the “Non-Visiting Collect
Employers.” These are employers who have asked the Career Services Office to collect resumes
of interested students and send the resumes as a group in one packet instead of having students
write to them individually. The office requests and maintains the same information of our NonVisiting Collect Employers as it does of those employers who schedule on-campus interview
dates.
In the fall of 2004, Career Services bundled 466 student applications for twenty-three NonVisiting Collect Employers. In the Fall of 2005, 637 student applications were bundled for 32
Non-Visiting Collect Employers. A student application consists of a student‟s resume, often with
other documentation attached, such as a copy of the student‟s transcript, a brief (five-ten page)
writing sample and/or a list of references. Some employers request a completed Application for
Employment or other documentation that is employer specific. The office also works with many
employers who post jobs ads with the office or who are still Non-Visiting Collect Employers, yet
they request that the students contact them individually. To date the office has no method of
tracking the number of postings or the number of students who have applied and/or successfully
gained employment from the posts. Similarly, the office has no method of tracking the number
of students who have contacted Non-Visiting Collect Employers.
3. Job Fairs
Law students may attend job fairs as an alternative to participating in OCI or the resume collect
service offered by Career Services. Job fairs may be a more efficient or effective job search
strategy for students in three categories: 1)students interested in jobs in certain geographic areas;
2) minority students; and 3) students interested in certain areas of practice, such as intellectual
property or public interest.
There are three types of job fairs that OCS interacts with: 1) those sponsored and staffed by
Career Services; 2) those in which Career Services participates and coordinates student
involvement; and 3) those that are identified and publicized to students and for which Career
Services provides usual support to students, such as by reviewing resumes.
Job fairs and consortium interview days are on the rise as cost effective and efficient ways to
engage employers. Students have access throughout these events to employers that would not
normally participate in any on-campus interviewing because of cost, a limited pool of applicants
at a single school, or the timing of their openings. The Law School believes these events can be
used to effectively expand the opportunities available to students consistent with their topical and
geographical interests. The Assistant Dean for Career Services is currently evaluating ways to
expand these programs.
218
4. Judicial Clerkships
During the 2005-06 year the Law School made a substantial commitment to increasing the
number students participating in state and federal judicial clerkships, both summer and
permanent.
A three-quarter time staff position, Career Counselor and Coordinator of Judicial Clerkships, was
created. Amy Liu filled this position after moving from Admissions. She works with a faculty
member, Tung Yin, to coordinate the judicial clerkship program. Ms. Liu works to „bundle‟
student applications and to facilitate participation in OSCAR, the on-line application process for
federal positions. She and Professor Yin also conduct informational and „how-to‟ workshops for
students.
TABLE 4-22 CLERKSHIPS CLASSES 2000-05 (as of January 25, 2006)
Graduating Class
# of Clerkships
State/Federal
2000
23
14/9
2001
20
10/10
2002
24
11/13
2003
28
19/9
2004
17
10/7
2005
22
16/6
In the future, this position will focus on work with faculty, students and alumni to identify and
groom students for clerkships. The Law School is significantly underrepresented in both state
and federal clerkship programs.
e. Counseling
Individual and group counseling occur both during walk-ins and by appointment. Unfortunately,
there is not historical data on this service.
To address the deficit, the office has initiated a tracking program for each contact with staff.
This data will be used to track the patterns of use of the office by students, alumni, faculty, staff
and employers.
f. Programming
1. Partner for a Day
Approximately half of the fist year class participates in the Partner for a Day program. This is a
short-term shadowing program that helps students clarify their career interests and begin
networking for future internships, externships and jobs. Alumni are enthusiastic supporters and
hosts for the program.
219
TABLE 4-23 PARTNER FOR A DAY
1999-2006
Academic # of students # of states
Year
1999-00
25
12
2000-01
50
11 & Canada
2001-02
73
18
2002-03
77
17 & England
2003-04
65
17
2004-05
68
19 & Brazil
2005-06
96
17 & France
This program will be reviewed during the 2006-2007 academic year to address the limitation of
its current title, redundancy of alumni volunteers, and possibilities for supporting further alumni
engagement with the Law School and Foundation.
2. Speakers
The consultant also suggested that the OCS program could benefit from an infusion of creative
program planning to meet the career and advising and information needs of law students in the
complex job market of today. Two specific areas were identified: job opportunities (especially
outside of Iowa and the Midwest) and career information (such as public interest, federal
government, non-traditional, and first year summer information).
Data about our programming reflects, as well, the shortage of staffing, as it is administered
primarily by a merit staff person, with the help of student workers.
TABLE 4-24 CAREER SERVICES PROGRAMMING
1999-2005
Academic
Speakers
Programs
Year
1999-00
110
42
2000-01
125
56
2001-02
144
56
2002-03
79
35
2003-04
124
49
2004-05
78
36
g. Strategies for 2006-07
The assistant dean will lead the Law School in a strategic planning process for career services.
This will culminate in a three year plan with specific goals, objectives, and benchmarks that
will instruct staffing and funding. Among the areas of focus will be:
220
1. Integrate OCS more effectively into student affairs. The Assistant Dean for Career
Services and the Associate Dean of Student Affairs will facilitate a planning session to provide
more seamless and comprehensive student services.
2. Review pre-screening by employers. Current feedback from employers indicates that
pre-screening is desirable. While it is true that candidates are taken off of a wait list, that is
simply an inefficient way, in the end, to pre-screen candidates. The key argument about
schools ranked above us not pre-screening is, according to employers, invalidated by the lack
of depth among students at Iowa as compared to higher ranked schools.
3. Alumni programs. The Assistant Dean of Career Services, along with the Dean and
Director of Development, will embark on an aggressive alumni engagement campaign to create
teams of helpful alumni in targeted geographic areas with specific goals for student
employment and career exploration.
4. Increase support to faculty programs starting with Intellectual Property. A
comprehensive program has been presented to Professor Janis that will serve as a model for
other programs within the curriculum that are of career interest to students and alumni.
5. Establish more opportunities for students interested in public interest careers.
Currently, the Assistant Dean is working with a sub-committee of students to identify
opportunities and create a program that assists students with the summer and full-time job
search process.
6. Expand interview opportunities with employers not represented in OCI by using
LawConnect video programs.
7. Develop and implement a comprehensive assessment program for all career services
programs and services.
E. Promoting Opportunities for Racial and Ethnic Minorities
The Law School strongly promotes admissions and professional opportunities for members of
groups which have been victims of discrimination in various forms. It continues to manage an
aggressive campaign to recruit qualified students from racial and ethnic minority backgrounds.
This effort has been in effect for nearly 40 years. In 1967, the law faculty voted to initiate a
program of special recruitment and admission of minority students, with a goal of having 10% of
the entering class comprised of students from minority backgrounds. That goal was long ago
eclipsed. The current Strategic Plan 2006-2010 now states that the Law School will “to the
fullest extent permitted by law, continue to play a leadership role in the recruitment, enrollment,
support, graduation and placement of students from racial, ethnic and cultural backgrounds that
are historically underrepresented in the legal profession.” We understand this goal to mean that
eventually the law school student body should be quite similar demographically to the U.S.
population at large. In the short run, we understand this goal to mean that the proportion of
students from minority racial, ethnic and cultural backgrounds in Iowa‟s student body should
221
equal or exceed the average proportion of such students nationally and among Iowa‟s peer
institutions.
The Law School has committed a significant amount of institutional resources to attracting and
enrolling a diverse class. The Law School often provides faculty support and participates in the
American Indian Law Center‟s summer program, PLSI. It is an important source for talented
Native American students. The College is also a long-standing supporter of the Council on
Legal Education Opportunity (CLEO) Summer Institutes, always contributing faculty and other
forms of support. Iowa hosted CLEO Institutes in 1969, 1980, 1985 and 1992. Finally, the
College of Law, with generous support from the Law School Admission Council, offers the
Philip G. Hubbard Law School Preparation program. Currently in its fifth year, this program
seeks to support diversity in the legal profession by inspiring students from historically
underrepresented groups to become lawyers and providing them with the skills and assistance
that will strengthen their preparation for law school. As Hubbard Fellows, participants receive a
generous stipend and other support. The program consists of classes, workshops and other
activities intended to build skills in legal analysis, legal writing and the study of legal concepts.
The Law School has hosted its own Minority Pre-Law Conference, known as Bridging The Gap,
every Spring since 1977, and is very well regarded in minority pre-law circles. We also initiate
targeted admissions information sessions with Minority Pre-Law societies around the country.
Some of the most recent visits for this purpose have been to Morehouse College, Spelman
College, Florida A&M University, University of Michigan, University of Wisconsin, University
of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana, University of Illinois at Chicago, and the National Black PreLaw Conference in 2005-2006, at which an admissions representative participated in training and
information panels and presentations. In 2006-2007, the College of Law made or will make
similar visits to University of Michigan, University of Wisconsin, Chicago State University,
Miami Law Fair, Butler University, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, and participation in
training and information panels at the National Black Pre-Law Conference.
With respect to admissions, Iowa has administered a special “numbers plus” program for
admission of all students, demonstrating high potential for academic success or professional
leadership, including students from minority racial and ethnic backgrounds traditionally
underrepresented in the law school world. The faculty has authorized the Admissions
Committee to make admission decisions that reflect not only the candidate‟s undergraduate GPA
and LSAT; but also a large number of other background factors deemed relevant to academic
and professional success, including race and ethnicity, that may be related to economic or
educational disadvantage, and to affirmatively seek to enhance the educational mission of the
school by adding diversity to the learning community. The Admissions Committee administers
its special admissions authority carefully and ambitiously, with respect to the school‟s diversity
goals. In recent years, the percentage of students from minority racial and ethnic backgrounds
has averaged about 19% of the entering class. This is no small accomplishment for a public law
school located in a state with 6.1% minority population.
Concerning financial aid, one of the keys to Iowa‟s success in recruiting and retaining minority
students is the substantial commitment to meeting the financial needs of qualified non-traditional
222
students, including students who represent groups historically underrepresented in the legal
profession. Besides the usual federally-insured student aid programs, and general need-based
and merit scholarships, annually over $850,000 in special Law Opportunity Fellowship funding
is made available to law students by the University. These funds, which are set aside for
students who come from economically or educationally disadvantaged backgrounds, are
extensively utilized to provide tuition grants, stipends and work-study support to qualified
students who bring in added measures of diversity to Iowa‟s learning community.
The Law School has long been seen as a leader within the University in recruiting a diverse
student body and faculty. For many years, the Law School has succeeded in enrolling a student
body whose diversity was the envy of other University graduate and professional programs. At
its peak, our minority enrollment consisted of more than one-quarter of the student body. In
recent years, competition for a shrinking minority applicant pool among top law schools became
more fierce, though Iowa has held its own.
Recruitment of minority students is only the start, however. Creating a welcoming and
supportive environment for ethnic and minority students is the other half of our obligation,
especially since most of them come from out of state and a significant portion from
undergraduate schools and communities that are considerably more diverse than our state or
University.
In the past two years, Dean Jones has convened discussions to learn what the Iowa experience is
like for our minority students. We have begun to identify ways that we can seek to improve the
environment to maximize learning for minority students at the same time that we build our
majority students‟ capacity to practice law and serve as leaders in an increasingly diverse
society. Some of the initiatives we‟ve undertaken or continued over the last two years, including
the following:
1. Each year the Law School helps fund students of color to travel to conferences or
national organization meetings where they can explore job opportunities and establish
educational and professional support networks.
2. In the last two years, the Law School co-sponsored “Back to Iowa” in conjunction with
African American alumni in the Chicago area. Last year students traveled to Chicago to network
and attend programs by alumni, hosted by a number of law firms.
3. Under the leadership of some minority students, a Diversity Forum was convened early
in the spring term 2006, and continued throughout the semester. Topics discussed were
Classroom Diversity Issues (how to address sensitive topics, for example); Career Development;
Recruitment and Retention; and Law Opportunity Fellowships. The discussion was frank and
many strategies were discussed. Among other requests, an orientation session specifically for
minority students was planned and held in August 2006.
As a result of these forum meetings, in mid-April 2006, Dean Jones announced the formation of
a Diversity Committee as one of the Law School‟s standing faculty student committees, which
223
Professor Boyd agreed to chair. The three-part charge was to consider ways to increase
understanding of diversity and the ways it affects life at the Law School and in professional
practice; provide input to Student Services, particularly Career Services and Admissions, on
ways to more effectively serve students and prospective students from under-represented groups;
and consider strategies to promote a welcoming climate that enhances the educational and work
experience of all students, staff and faculty. In a Spring 2006 term negotiations class, a faculty
member read from two texts containing the "N" word in two successive classes (Lyndon
Johnson biography and Fannie Lou Hamer speech), which prompted a student complaint. Dean
Jones asked the committee to start its work over the summer of 2006, and added a fourth charge:
promote student-faculty discussion of issues arising from the use of potentially offensive
materials in the classroom. The committee was responsible for developing an enhanced focus on
diversity during Orientation Week.
The Diversity Committee hosted a productive faculty lunch time discussion on November 17
during which a panel of students and faculty discussed ways in which to maximize classroom
discussion around sensitive topics.
If prospective students or applicants inquire about the Law School‟s policies and practices
regarding disabilities, they are directed to the Associate Dean of Student Affairs. The policies are
available on the Law School‟s web site as well. All enrolled students are asked to identify
themselves early if they are disabled and wish to discuss the Law School‟s policies or procedures
for providing accommodations for educational programs or examinations. The Associate Dean
for Student Affairs provides anonymity to the student to the fullest extent possible. In addition,
law students can take advantage of services offered by the University‟s Student Disability
Service office and are referred there. That office and the specialist psychologists at the
University Counseling Service consult with the Associate Dean as requested to help evaluate the
nature of the disability presented and to determine what will be the appropriate accommodations.
Finally, informal counseling is provided to students with disabilities about the challenges that
may be posed in the workforce.
F. Pro Bono Opportunities
For approximately six years, the Iowa Student Bar Association (student government), with the
assistance of the Law School administration, has run the Pro Bono Project, a formal volunteer
program. Students record their hours spent in qualifying community service in the Dean‟s
administrative office. In the 2004-05 academic year, the ISBA changed the program‟s name to
the Boyd Service Award, to honor Professor and President Emeritus Willard “Sandy” Boyd. The
ISBA Philanthropy Committee administers the program, and set out its mission statement as:
To recognize law students who provide volunteer services to charitable, religious, civic,
community, governmental and educational organizations in furtherance of those organization‟s
missions to improve the community.
Depending on the number of hours spent in service, students earn distinctions at the honors, high
honors, and highest honors levels at graduation. Graduating students who earn this distinction
224
wear an honor cord during the commencement ceremony and have a special seal placed on their
diploma.
Starting in the current academic year, the Law School administration has used its Symplicity
software (in the Career Services office) to list community agencies that have called for
volunteers. A research assistant works with an associate dean to locate appropriate placements
and to call these to students‟ attention through listing them on Symplicity. We have seen a sharp
increase in the number of students who are logging their hours in the program. 119 current
students are keeping an accounting of their hours.
Additionally, many student organizations run contribution drives for community agencies and do
service projects. A few examples from this past semester alone include: the Black Law Students
Association ran a clothing drive for a neighborhood center; the PAD fraternity raised money for
the local animal shelter; the Organization for Women Law Students and Staff is planning its
annual effort to volunteer at a domestic violence shelter “souper bowl” fundraiser; the ISBA is
planning its third annual “Trial Run” to benefit Legal Aid of Iowa; the Christian Legal Society
conducted a bake sale for the Salvation Army; the Equal Justice Foundation and ISBA held a
faculty auction where over $16,000 was raised for summer public interest fellowships; and PAD
is cooking dinner at the Ronald MacDonald house.
In March 2005, over spring break, as previously mentioned, over forty Iowa law students
traveled to New Orleans to volunteer in hurricane clean up efforts. Half the group contributed
manual labor and half worked with legal agencies. The Iowa Law School contingent was the
largest registered through the Student Hurricane Network. The ISBA and EJF are planning a
return trip during spring break 2007.
Finally, plans are underway to dedicate more administrative resources to a pro bono
service/service learning program at the Law School.
225
ATTACHMENT 4-7 STUDENT FOCUS GROUP NOTES, SPRING 2006
General Concerns
Wireless internet should be made available throughout the building.
Grading policy should be changed to make more practical information available that would
aid students in dealing with employers.
Facilities should be improved to provide better sense of community, especially the lounge.
Teaching Evaluations and Methods
Expand both the scope and the number of quantitative questions in the student evaluations.
Expanded quantitative results should be made available for student examination, and this
availability should be well publicized.
Students appreciated faculty-conducted mid-term course evaluations.
Book selection in sequential classes should be standardized in order to reduce rising cost of
textbooks.
Students seemed to enjoy the variety of teaching methods, and did not express a clear
preference for any.
Student Organizations
Organizations are wide-ranging, student directed, and new organizations are easily
established.
Communication with the greater university (UISG), especially in regards to funding, is
mechanical and overly complicated.
Students would like to see professors take a larger interest in organizations, perhaps
mentioning events in class, and increasing involvement in the faculty auction.
More information about the range of organizations, other than the student organization fair,
should be presented, and at different times of the year than just the first week.
Expectations after Admission and before Matriculation
Most students expressed positive feelings about their expectations being met.
Admissions should perhaps be more honest about difficulties, pressures of law school, and,
for example, availability of RA positions.
Diversity of classes offered seems to be low. Students expressed that, especially during the
spring, classes seem to be geared towards business and IP.
Admissions should put more of a focus on what makes Iowa unique.
Student Advising
Student concern exists about the loss of the Academic Achievement Program.
○
Reviews were mixed.
○
The most effective presentations were those that were co-run by faculty.
○
Perhaps a new facilitator should have a J.D.
○
Student-based mentoring should be encouraged.
Exam feedback is virtually non-existent, and should be increased.
○
Academic achievement could provide a neutral ground for this feedback.
226
Faculty Advisor program is underutilized.
○
Most students seemed not to be in contact with their assigned advisors.
○
Perhaps advisors could be assigned after student has chosen a focus, or advisor could be
selected by students based on specialty of faculty.
Orientation Program
Most agreed that the class was for the most part useful, but that the meetings and
presentations made the week too busy – information overload.
Students appreciated the pass/fail nature and feedback available from the exam.
Perhaps the class could provide a better transition to law school by concentrating more on
practical skills for succeeding in law school.
Diversity
Some publications over-represented the minority presence at the Law School, such as the
Advocate, and the web site.
Students sense that an institutional will and efforts to attract a critical mass of students from
diverse backgrounds exist, but that given the nature of Iowa, it is difficult to achieve.
If not already being done, minority students should be utilized to help recruit more minority
students, in the form of personal contact with prospective students.
Students suggested increasing the diversity of faculty, and also the number of course
offerings focused on diversity.
Student Governance
Student government elections are a bit early in the year, especially for L1s, which in their
case can lead to a focus on popularity.
Some problems with lack of continuity in membership.
Students would like to see more communication from their representatives about what they
are working on.
Students are happy about having their voice heard on faculty committees.
Perhaps an ISBA informational meeting could be held in order to increase awareness of the
positions / responsibilities available.
Student Discipline
The discipline process seemed to be quite slow in determining punishments, which can
unfairly place people in limbo.
Increase student involvement in the discipline process, if this is not already being done.
Perhaps the reports of misconduct and repercussions can be better publicized in order to
increase awareness.
Suggestion of implementing an honor code.
Publications
Over-representation of minorities in publications.
More “Fast Fact” type of information that prospective students can use in comparing schools.
Publications should be more uniform, so they are more self-identifying.
227
ATTACHMENT 4-8 STUDENT SERVICES COMMMITTEE REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION FOR CONTINUATION OF THE ACADEMIC
ACHIEVEMENT PROGRAM, JANUARY 19, 2006
The Student Services Committee (hereinafter “the committee”) met on Thursday, Jan. 19,
2006 to discuss the Academic Achievement Program (AAP) and the impending departure of
its director, Dr. Peters. Nine committee members attended the meeting (including two of the
three student members), and the committee received written comments from two absent
members as well as from Daniel Dvorak, a member of the Self Study Committee who is
helping to prepare the portion of that committee‟s report dealing with the AAP.
After lengthy discussion, the committee recommends that you appoint a full-time interim
Academic Achievement Director to assume Dr. Peters‟ duties immediately upon her
departure, for a period of up to two years. Ideally, the person appointed would begin
approximately a month before Dr. Peters‟ departure so as to permit a smooth transition for
existing programs and procedures.
In making this recommendation, the committee is aware that you have given thought to
making only a part time interim appointment. We are also aware that some of our colleagues
are skeptical as to whether the AAP will continue to be necessary, at least in its present
incarnation, after the new Legal Research and Writing (LRW) program is in place. However,
the committee is of the opinion that most, if not all, of the functions of the AAP are important
to the success of the Law School‟s mission and will not be assumed by the new LRW
program. Indeed, it seems likely that the LRW program may actually create unanticipated
additional needs for academic support both because some areas of the curriculum will be
explored more intensively, and because having a new group of faculty members working
closely with small groups of students may result in the identification of additional academic
support needs. The committee recommends that the AAP continue in more or less its current
form under an interim director until it can be evaluated after some experience with the LRW
program in place. Doing so would permit the AAP to avoid losing its constituencies and
momentum. After one or more semesters‟ experience with the LRW program, it should be
possible to determine if modifications are needed in the AAP or if any components of AAP
are no longer required.
We make this recommendation for several reasons. Committee discussion and the written
comments received reveal that, although the AAP is certainly not without its critics,
substantial constituencies exist for almost all of the services and programs currently offered
by the AAP. The study skills and exam preparation programs, the First Year at Iowa
program (FYI), facilitated exam review involving both Dr. Peters and faculty members,
exploration of study habits and learning strategies with individual students, assistance to
journals and other student groups, creation and distribution of time management materials,
and individual counseling and referral were all mentioned as useful program components
relied on by students. One committee member described the key element of the program as
director/faculty interaction in devising strategies for students who, despite their intelligence,
“don‟t get it.” Another analogized the need for academic support to the faculty need for
228
computer support. We are unpersuaded that academic support is solely the job of the faculty.
We note that the faculty, composed entirely of people who excelled in law school, may not
necessarily be well situated to explore learning strategies or provide supplementary support
for students who don‟t excel. Moreover, the AAP provides support and services even for
students not encountering academic difficulty: teaching time management and tweaking
study habits to permit students to use time more efficiently, offering programs to help all
students make the transition to law study, and providing personal counseling and referral.
These are not areas in which faculty members have particular expertise.
Finally, the committee believes that the AAP received a full and favorable review from our
faculty four years ago, and that it should remain in place and fully active until the faculty has
the opportunity to do another full review taking into account substantial input from the
student body. The program has accomplished the goals set for it at its inception: helping
students in academic difficulty, serving as a resource for all students, and avoiding
stigmatizing those students who use the program. Several committee members recall the
well meant but insufficient efforts made by the faculty to provide academic support in the
years preceding the AAP, and have no wish to return to that era. Dean McGuire provided the
group with a partial list of other law schools that operate academic support programs and
some information about those programs. This is a group of schools with which Iowa very
much wants to be associated, we believe. Dr. Peters informed us that the field of academic
support is a dynamic one and that some schools now employ more than one academic
support staff member, and are expanding their efforts to include work on bar passage and
other new projects.
We recommend that the Iowa Law School begin looking right away for a full-time person to
assume Dr. Peter‟s duties on an interim basis for a period not to exceed two years. We
further recommend that the Law School begin a comprehensive review of its academic
support needs during the spring semester of the 2006-07 academic year, and that such review
be completed before any action is taken to truncate the program. Please let us know if we
can do anything further in this regard.
229
CHAPTER FIVE: ADMINISTRATION
A. Administration
The major administrative challenge since the last Self Study was the 2003-2004 search for a new
Dean to replace N. William Hines, who held the position for twenty-eight years and was the longest
sitting law dean in the United States at the time. Over 200 nominees and applicants were considered
in that process by a Search Committee appointed by Provost Jon Whitmore. The Search Committee
consisted of several constituencies. The professors were elected by the faculty. The students were
chosen by the Iowa Student Bar Association Board. The staff members were selected by an election
of eligible staff. The one alumna was a member of the Iowa Law Foundation Board. The Committee
winnowed the nominee list and preliminarily interviewed a pool of twenty persons, and then
reduced that number to seven outside candidates who came to campus for full interviews. The
faculty approved and forwarded three of these names to President David Skorton. President
Skorton selected Carolyn Jones from the three names submitted. The pool considered throughout
the process remained diverse as to race, gender, age and other criteria.
The transition to a new Dean and a new generation of leadership has been a smooth one. She
maintains the open door policy characteristic of the prior administration, even though additional
fundraising responsibilities have increased the time away from the Law School. Additional
administrative positions have been created since the time of the last Self Study which enhance the
ability of the Law School to fulfill its mission under new leadership.
The Dean of the College is the chief executive officer of the Law School, and she reports to Provost
Michael J. Hogan. The Dean is evaluated every five years by the faculty via a confidential survey
sent to the Provost‟s office. During the period of this Self Study, the Law School has maintained a
solid relationship with the central administration, which has continued under the new Dean.
Moreover, two tenured members of the law faculty serve full-time in central administration.
Professor Pat Cain, who has served as Interim Provost, is currently Vice Provost. Professor Marcella
David is Associate Provost for Diversity and Special Assistant to the President for Equal
Opportunity and Diversity. Communications and information from the central administration of the
University are channeled through the Dean‟s office, and internal collegiate policies adopted by the
faculty or the Dean, in accordance with their respective roles, are administered through the Dean‟s
office.
Administrative responsibility is delegated to five Associate Deans, who are responsible for Research
and Information Management, Academic Affairs, Faculty Development, Student Affairs, and
International and Comparative Legal Programs. Additionally there are three Assistant Deans for
Admissions, Finance & Administration, and Career Services. While major academic policies are
adopted only after faculty vote, many operational decisions affecting the Law School are made by the
Dean after an informal process of consultation with faculty members, administrative staff and
students.
230
Carolyn Jones is the current Dean of the Law School and is the F. Wendell Miller Professor of Law
as well as a tenured member of the faculty. She was appointed to her current position in 2004 after
the search process mentioned above. Dean Jones was born in 1955, and grew up in Carroll, Iowa.
She obtained her B.A. degree from the University of Iowa in English Phi Beta Kappa in 1976. She
completed course work for a Masters Degree in English with a specialty in medieval and Celtic
Literature at Iowa as well. She earned her J.D. degree Order of the Coif from Iowa in 1979, and
served as an editor of the IOWA LAW REVIEW. Dean Jones earned a LL.M. in Tax from Yale in 1982.
She practiced law for two years, serving as an Assistant City Attorney in Sioux City, Iowa in 197980, and as an associate at Klass, Whicher & Mishne in Sioux City in 1980-81. She began her
teaching career as an assistant professor at St. Louis University Law School in 1982, and was
promoted to associate professor in 1986. Dean Jones was a visiting professor at Iowa in 1986-87 and
during the summer 1989. She was promoted to professor at St. Louis in 1989. She visited at the
University of Connecticut Law School in 1989-90, and became a professor there in 1990. She served
as Associate Dean for Academic Affairs in 1994-97. She was a visiting professor at Exeter
University in 1993, at Washington University St. Louis Law School in Spring 1999, and at Ohio
State in 2003-04. Her scholarly and teaching interests are in Federal Taxation, Estate and Gift
Taxation, and the Legal History of American Women and Taxation.
In addition to the administrators whose positions are described below, the Dean‟s office is
supported by the Dean‟s personal secretary, Julie Kramer, whose office adjoins the Dean‟s office. She
also provides administrative and secretarial assistance to the Dean, Associate Dean for Student
Affairs, and Assistant Dean for Finance and Administration, exercising a high degree of
discretion and independent judgment. The Dean is also supported by two receptionists/secretaries,
Rene Arps and Vicki MacLeod, who greet visitors as they enter the suite and who perform additional
administrative and secretarial duties.
The Associate Dean for Research and Information Management, Arthur E. Bonfield, serves on a halftime basis as the head of the Law Library and has oversight responsibility for all aspects of law
library administration. While he reports to and is subject to the authority of the Dean on all matters,
he deals directly with the University central administration with respect to university funding and
other support for the Law Library. The Executive Librarian, Mary Ann Nelson, reports directly to
the Associate Dean for Research.
The Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, Eric G. Andersen, serves on a half-time basis and
coordinates the academic program of the Law School. He has responsibility for working with the
Curriculum committee to formulate sound curricular policies, and working with the faculty on
teaching assignments and teaching loads. In addition, he is actively involved in Faculty
Appointments, space assignments in the law building, electronic information technology, and the
assignment of support staff to faculty. He is also involved with budgetary matters for the Law
School. The Associate Dean for Academic Affairs frequently represents the Law School at meetings
or functions which the Dean is unable to attend, and handles a wide variety of problems and tasks as
requested by the Dean. Dean Andersen has held this position since 1998, and was actively involved in
the important transition from Dean Hines to Dean Jones. He will return to the faculty full-time in
January 2007, and will be replaced by Professor Jonathan C. Carlson.
231
The Associate Dean for Faculty Development, Adrien K. Wing, serves on a half-time basis. This
position was created when Dean Jones became Dean and the initial occupant was Professor Peg
Brinig, who performed the tasks on a quarter-time basis. The reconfigured position involves
responsibility for the scholarly, teaching and service missions of the faculty. Dean Wing is actively
involved with Faculty Appointments, the mentoring program for pre-tenure faculty, the three-year
review process for pre-tenure faculty, the tenure process, post-tenure review, faculty teaching load,
the Speakers Committee, teaching improvement, teaching awards, faculty development leaves,
travel funds, and summer research support. She serves as the SSRN editor and as the faculty
newsletter editor. She is also involved with budgetary matters for the Law School, and may
represent the institution at meetings or functions which the Dean is unable to attend.
The Associate Dean for International and Comparative Law Programs, John C. Reitz, serves on a
quarter-time basis and coordinates both the J.D. curriculum and the LL.M. program in the areas of
international and comparative law. He supervises LL.M. admissions, financial aid, research
assistantships, and teaches the LL.M. tutorial, a comparative introduction to U.S. Law, as well as the
LL.M. seminar in which LL.M. students write their LL.M. papers. He also coordinates international
scholars, and serves as the faculty supervisor for the International Law Society, the relatively new
Human Rights student group, and the TRANSNATIONAL LAW AND CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS
JOURNAL. In addition, he represents the Law School on the Executive Committee of the
University‟s International Programs.
The Associate Dean for Student Affairs, Linda McGuire, has served in that capacity since 1996.
She directs, plans and manages all aspects of student affairs and all major activities of the Law
School that impact student life. She is the associate dean charged with administering the Law
School‟s
policy
on
disability
accommodations
and
administering
academic
regulations. She counsels students about academic, professional and personal matters; organizes
the faculty advising system; conducts exit interviews with students who wish to withdraw from
the Law School; guides the administration of student misconduct proceedings; serves in an ex
officio capacity on all faculty committees except speakers, appointments, and admissions; and
oversees student orientation. She supervises the Registrar and that office‟s functions, the
Academic Achievement Program, and the office of Financial Aid. She teaches one three unit
course a year and supervises the Prosecutor Intern Program.
Dean McGuire will move to another position as soon as a replacement is found after a national
search. She will start the newly created post of Associate Dean for Civic and Community
Engagement (3/4-time), which will identify, create and support a wide range of volunteer, pro
bono, and service learning opportunities in the community and throughout the state.
The Program's goals are to to instill in Iowa law students a spirit of public service, to partner
with non-profit agencies and governmental entities in serving the needs of the community; and to
develop students' professional skills and values. Particular activities will include: maintaining
data bases of appropriate community service opportunities; making student referrals
to community service placements; and working with law school and university faculty to explore
the creation of for-credit, service learning components of classes that combine learning legal and
professional skills with giving community service.
232
The Assistant Dean for Finance & Administration is a position that has been created since the
last Self Study. Gordon Tribbey directs and manages financial, operational and human resources
activities which include budget preparation, financial planning and reporting, cost and revenue
analysis, operational policies and procedures, organizational structure, compensation,
classification, staffing, payroll, etc. He also directs and supervises secretarial and faculty support
staff.
The Assistant Dean for Career Services is a new position. Steve Langerud directs and manages
all aspects of career services activities which include developing programs and policies for
career counseling and placement; developing contacts with a variety of private and public
institutions to determine employment needs and encourage recruitment; counseling students and
alumni about career planning and employment opportunities; and managing career services staff
members.
The Director of Career Services, Karen Klouda, provides leadership and oversight in the planning
and promotion of career services activities which include managing the on-campus interview
process; overseeing operations of the Symplicity database; counseling and advising students
regarding employment search activities; and supervising support staff Craig Spitzer.
The Career Advising and Judicial Clerkship Coordinator position has been created since the last
Self Study. Amy Liu provides counseling and advice to students regarding non-clinical
externships/internships and judicial and government externships and assists students with
applications for these positions; advises students interested in joint degrees and assists in course
selection to attain success in area of career goals/interests, emphasizing the interrelationship
between academic preparation and career development.
The Assistant Dean for Admissions, Collins Byrd, directs and manages all aspects of student
admission activities which include recruiting, advising and evaluating potential students; meeting
enrollment goals and objectives for each term; advising prospective students and parents on
admissions policies and academic requirements; evaluating applications for admissions, making
appropriate decisions, and ensuring proper communication to applicants and other stakeholders;
and managing admission office staff members.
The Assistant Director of Admissions position is a new position, and is currently vacant. The
position provides leadership and oversight of student admission activities which include
participating in planning and implementation of student outreach, orientation and academic
counseling; advising prospective students and parents on admissions policies and academic
requirements; and evaluating transcripts and applications for admissions and recommending
action within established guidelines.
The Admissions Coordinator, Jan Barnes, provides management assistance to the Assistant
Dean for Admissions in all aspects of student recruitment and admissions activities which
include maintaining, organizing and analyzing data on applicants; coordinating visitation days,
233
conferences and institutes; overseeing the processing of applicants‟ files; and supervising the
admissions office support staff, Karen Sojka and Melissa Plummer.
The Director of Financial Aid, Susan Palmer, directs and manages all aspects of financial aid
activities which include directing financial aid services for current and prospective law students;
and developing and implementing policies and procedures to maintain the fiscal integrity of Law
School financial aid funds. She directs and oversees the student employment program. She is
assisted by Jessica Diers.
The Executive Director of Development position is currently vacant, but an offer has been made to
Andrew Sheehy. The Executive Director develops and coordinates, in cooperation with the
University of Iowa Foundation staff members, a comprehensive fund-raising program for the
Law School. The Executive Director conducts fundraising activities according to the established
procedures, policies, and standards agreed upon jointly by the Law School Foundation and the
UI Foundation and by utilizing the services and capabilities available through the UI
Foundation‟s executive and support staffs and office systems. The Executive Director works
closely with the Dean to assure that the fund-raising program is operated in accordance with the
procedures, goals, and needs of the Law School and has the full support, cooperation and
involvement of the faculty and administrators. The Executive Director is based at the UI
Foundation.
The Associate Development Director is Rod Schulz. In 2005, the Iowa Law School Foundation
voted to create this position to more effectively implement our development plans. Mr. Schulz
was hired in January 2006 and works extensively with our class agents and is responsible for a
geographic area as well. He stepped in as the sole development person when our Executive
Director Peter Wilch left in September 2006 to become Vice President of Alumni Relations and
Communications at his alma mater Grinnell College.
The Registrar, Deb Paul, manages all registrar related activities which include academic
recordkeeping; degree clearances and bar certifications; degree audit, transcript and verification
services; enrollment support including course registration, scheduling and student information
systems; and misconduct and retention case files. She compiles and provides statistical reports,
including grade studies, matriculation reports, etc.
The Writing Center Director, Dr. Nancy Jones, performs administrative and teaching activities in
the Writing Center which include supervising one-on-one professional and peer tutoring to law
students; presenting editing workshops to staff members of the Law School journals; presenting
courses to law students on grammar, style and the rhetoric of effective legal writing; and
assisting faculty members in the design of writing assignments and the use of writing in their
courses. Dr. Jones is a non-lawyer with a Ph.D. in English. In this transitional year in the LAWR
program, she is assisted by four part-time lawyers. Two of these lawyers, Matt Williamson and
Dawn Andersen, are adjuncts teaching one class each as well for the LAWR program for this year
only. One staffer, Teresa Wagner, is a graduate of the Law School. Another staffer, Janine Price,
is pursuing a MFA degree in writing at Iowa‟s famed Writers‟ Workshop. In the past, the Center has
234
been able to draw part-time staffers from the lawyers in that program. The Center is also staffed by
three or four upper-level law student TAs who have strong credentials as writing tutors.
The Academic Achievement Director position is currently vacant and is being staffed
temporarily by two part time alums, Brian Farrell and Chace Ramey. The Director plans and
coordinates activities to assist students in developing effective learning strategies and in making
the transition to successful law study, which includes planning and coordinating lectures and
workshops, consulting on the orientation program, counseling students with poor performance
on exams, working with faculty members in diagnosing academic and methodological
deficiencies of students with academic difficulty, developing individualized academic support
plans and serving as a resource to instructors interested in providing individualized academic
support.
Director of Information Technology, Dr. Kirk Corey, directs and manages all aspects of
information technology which includes managing staff members; creating and managing
databases; performing and supervising the installation, maintenance and upgrading of servers,
workstations, peripherals, data ports and other equipment; installing operating systems,
application programs and connectivity software.
The Networks coordinator, Apryl Betts, plans and provides technical leadership related to
networked servers, workstations and printers; performs and supervises the installation,
maintenance, upgrades, backups and restores of file, print and Web servers, workstations,
peripherals and other equipment; provides assistance to end users.
Web Development is under the direction of Robert Ramsey. He plans and provides technical
leadership on the lawweb and law-dev servers, including hardware maintenance and diagnostics,
maintenance of applicable security updates, troubleshooting and corrective actions; creates,
designs and writes interfaces for web based databases; writes custom programs for various
utilities, software updates and network tasks; and provides assistance to end users.
Desktop Support is under the supervision of Jeremy Kupka, who provides end-user support for
faculty, staff and students; installs and configures workstations, software, printers and other
peripherals; and manages end-user accounts and other resources.
Video Systems are managed by Patty Ankrum. She coordinates and provides technical videorelated activities for faculty, staff and students and supervises staff to accommodate service
requests. She is assisted by Dan Bell.
The Continuing Legal Education Coordinator is Carolyn Tappan. Professors Allen and Whiston
plan the CLE programs and Ms. Tappan coordinates the implementation of the programs.
Additionally, she serves as the primary exam coordinator at the conclusion of each semester.
The Communications/Publication Editor is Jill De Young. This is a position that has been
created since the last Self Study. She provides leadership and advice on all communication and
media relations activities which include development and production of the Iowa Advocate;
235
creation and maintenance of the web site content; and preparation and distribution of enewsletters for alumni. She also undertakes special project assignments from the Dean.
The Bookstore Manager is Heidi Van Auken. She supervises and coordinates all aspects of the
ISBA Bookstore activities which include inventory management, purchasing of books, managing
cash, reconciling invoices and supervising and scheduling all staff support.
The Human Resources Administrator is a new 75% position. Judy Millies administers and
advises on all aspects of human resource activities which include transaction processing, record
keeping, benefits, classification, and compensation. She also provides employment best
practices for the Law School.
The structure of the Dean‟s office is reflected on the following TABLE 5-1 Table of Organization:
236
Table 5-1 Table of Organization: College of Law
Dean
Carolyn Jones
Executive Director of Development
Andrew Sheehy {incoming}
Associate Development Director Rod Schultz
Communications/Publications Editor
Jill De Young
Assoc. Dean for Research
Assoc. Dean- Int‟l Assoc. Dean for
and Information Management & Comparative
Student Affairs
(Law Library Oversight)
Program
Linda McGuire
Arthur Bonfield
John Reitz
Executive Librarian
Mary Ann Nelson
{See Law Library Table for
Library Organizations}
Director of
Registrar
Financial Aid Deb Paul
Susan Palmer
Assistant to the Dean
Julie Kramer
Assoc. Dean for Assoc. Dean for
Asst. Dean for
Faculty Develop. Civic Engagement Career Services
Adrien Wing
Linda McGuire
Steve Langerud
{incoming}
Academic
Achievement Dir.
Brian Farrell
Chace Ramey
CLE Coordinator
Carolyn Tappan
Assoc. Dean for
Asst. Dean
Asst. Dean for
Academic Affairs for Admissions Finance & Admin.
Jonathan Carlson Collins Byrd
Gordon Tribbey
{as of Jan. 2007}
Academic &
Director of
Writing Center Assistant
Career Advisor Career Services Director
Director
Amy Liu
Karen Klouda Nancy Jones {vacant}
Exam Coordinator
Carolyn Tappan
Admissions
Coordinator
Jan Barnes
Career Services Assoc. Dir. (3)
Assistant
Craig Spitzer
237
Director of
Information Technology
Kirk Corey
HR
Administrator
Judy Millies
---------
Networks Web Development Desktop Support Video Systems
Apryl Betts
Robert Ramsey
Jeremy Kupka
Patty Ankrum
Reception &
co-curricular staff
Bookstore
Manager
Heidi Van Auken
Secretarial
Staff Coordinator
Diana DeWalle
4th floor
Secretarial Staff
Affiliated
IT Staff
January 2007
B. Continuing Legal Education
1. Rationale
The Law School‟s teaching, research and service missions are all furthered by a vigorous and high
quality CLE program. In many instances members of the law faculty are in the forefront of
developments in the law and are uniquely able to inform the practitioner of the significance and
portent of new legislation or judicial or administrative decisions. Often, for example, no one is
better qualified to explain complex legislation than the faculty member who has assisted in drafting it
or who has written an article criticizing it. In short, we have a unique reservoir of legal talent that can be
employed to improve the quality of legal services rendered by practicing attorneys in the state and
region. As a state-supported institution, the Law School bears a special responsibility for service to
the State, an obligation satisfied in part by our assisting in the continuing education of the bar. Not
only are lawyers benefited, but the quality of legal services provided to the citizens of the state is
improved when legal practitioners have access to up-to-date information provided by the Law
School.
2. History of CLE at Iowa
Iowa has had a long and rich continuing legal education tradition reaching back to the 1880s. One could
fairly conclude that the first state continuing legal education program in the country took place during
the first regular meeting of the Iowa State Bar Association on May 14, 1875, three years before the
organization of the American Bar Association. Iowa faculty members were among the first to speak
at bar continuing legal education programs. Over 100 years ago the Law School sponsored (with
the Bar Association) the first continuing legal program in honor of former United States Supreme
Court Justice John Marshall. In 1931 Paul Sayre of the Law School faculty urged the Bar to engage in
“some investigation or other effort to increase the skill of lawyers.” In 1937-38, the president of the
bar association, Burt Thompson, urged the holding of legal clinics in judicial districts and local
meetings throughout the state during the year and requested the cooperation of the Law School faculty
to participate as speakers. Clinics were held in districts in over half the state, with Mason Ladd of the
Iowa faculty participating in the first clinic which was held in the old twelfth judicial district. The Iowa
program became so popular that thirteen other states and the Philippines adopted the plan. The Iowa
experience received so much national attention that the American Bar Association made the holding
of legal institutes a major objective in 1939.
In 1948 Dean Mason Ladd reported that the faculty had lectured on topics of public law, labor law,
trial technique, and private law in many institutes throughout the state. By 1955, the Law School was
sponsoring two continuing legal education programs annually and in 1963 over 500 persons
attended the four programs held that year. Since 1980, the Law School has regularly offered at least
six programs each year and averaged nearly 800-1,000 attendees per year.
3. CLE Program 2000-2006
Clinical professors John Allen and John Whiston now help oversee the CLE program. Carolyn
Tappan is the primary coordinator. From January 1, 2000 through June 30, 2006. the Iowa Law
238
School presented eighty-four continuing legal education programs on a wide variety of topics at which
424 hours of instruction were offered. Total attendance at these programs was 4,875. Speakers at these
programs have included Iowa Law School faculty, faculty from other law schools, practicing
attorneys, and others, including state and federal judges. Only 12% of the total hours of
programming was presented by Iowa Law School faculty, and over 80% of the credit hours were
presented by selected Iowa lawyers and judges. The Law School offered the first on-line CLE
program in the spring of 2006 and hopes to continue this practice. The Law School‟s CLE program
has always been revenue producing, and now more so, since all of the registration process is done
in-house.
The faculty has not discussed the goals of CLE and the faculty‟s role in CLE in a long time. The
faculty coordinators plan to review the program market and generate discussion among faculty
members about the future direction of the program.
239
CHAPTER SIX: LAW LIBRARY
A. Introduction
The University of Iowa Law Library is one of the most comprehensive and in-depth legal
information resource centers in the United States. The quantity, quality, depth, breadth, and
diversity of its readily accessible information resources appear to be clearly exceeded by only
one law school library and equaled by less than a handful of law school libraries in this country.
There is no doubt that the Iowa Law Library is one of the most distinguished, high quality, and
nationally preeminent resources of the University of Iowa as a whole, and a principal foundation
on which the national reputation of the University of Iowa College of Law rests. In order to
maintain its preeminence as one of the very best places to do legal research in this country the
Iowa Law Library is committed to providing its users with immediate on-site access to the
widest variety of legal and law related information possible, regardless of format, that may be of
help to them in their educational and research pursuits. As a result, the University of Iowa Law
Library seeks to ensure, within the resources available, on-site access in this Library to the most
comprehensive and in-depth array of legal and legally related information resources possible so
that its hardcopy, microform, and electronic information resources collection is adequate to
facilitate and support a premier academic and professional program in law in which there is
distinguished domestic, international, comparative, and foreign law scholarship and teaching of
both a traditional and interdisciplinary nature, and to meet the needs for legal and legally related
materials in the University of Iowa community at large and the state of Iowa as a whole. The
Law Library is also committed to providing its users with expeditious access to off-site
information resources not available in this library. Finally, the Law Library is committed to
providing all of its users with the services and educational programs that will enable them to
effectively and productively use all of the information resources it makes available to them.
One of the highest priorities of the Law School is to maintain and enhance the outstanding
quality of its Law Library because of the very central role it plays in the educational and research
program of the College and because it represents one of the most nationally visible pillars on
which the reputation of the Law School rests. There is no doubt that a great historical strength
of this law school and the University of Iowa has been its Law Library. The nationally
outstanding collection of on-site, in-depth and comprehensive information resources in this Law
Library has helped to attract scholars to the faculty of the Law School and to keep them here,
has helped attract visitors to the Law School from all of the world, has facilitated the creation of
an unusually diverse and rich curriculum, has fostered interdisciplinary work, and has facilitated
much closer interactions between the Law School and other parts of this University, the bar and
judiciary of this state, and Iowa state government, than would be the case if it were a library of
lesser quality. The contents of this Law Library Self Study are consistent with and implement the
Law Library Strategic Plan, which is part of the College of Law Strategic Plan. See Appendix 11 and 6-1.
240
B. Mission
The University of Iowa Law Library has three basic missions: first, to support all of the
domestic, international, comparative, and foreign law scholarship and teaching of both a
traditional and interdisciplinary nature that occur in the Law School; second, to provide the legal
and legally related materials necessary to support the research and teaching activities that occur
in the University of Iowa community at large; third, to serve the legal research needs of Iowa
government officials, the Iowa legal profession, and the Iowa general public for legal
information resources not otherwise available to them. The Law Library also seeks to maintain
its position as the best public law school library in the nation and as one of the two or three best
public or private law school libraries in the nation, as measured by its accessible on-site legal
information resources. A library of such outstanding quality is necessary because it is a
prerequisite to the accomplishment of the Law School‟s academic aspirations and the successful
performance of its academic missions. Such a library also significantly enhances the reputation
of the Law School to persons outside of the institution who may have need to use its extensive
information resources.
C. Assumptions of Law Library Self Study
This Law Library Self Study reflects seven major assumptions about the environment in which
the Law Library will operate in the near future. First, the large and disproportionate inflation in
the price of law books and other legal information resources will continue for the foreseeable
future and, therefore, will continue to create special problems of great magnitude for the ongoing
acquisition program of the Law Library. Second, pressure on Law Library resources by students
at this law school will increase in coming years. The educational program of the University of
Iowa Law School focuses on intensive student legal writing and research, reinforcing the special
centrality of the Law Library to the educational mission of the College as a whole. This imposes
unusually heavy demands on the collection and public services of this particular law school
library. There is every indication that there will be even greater emphasis on student legal
writing and research at this school in the future, increasing the already unusually heavy demands
on Law Library resources. Third, pressure on Law Library resources by faculty teaching and
scholarship at this law school will continue to increase in coming years. The increasing diversity
and interdisciplinary nature of law faculty research and teaching and the quantitative increase in
law faculty research during recent years has increased the pressures on the collection and public
services of the Law Library as well as increased the importance of resource sharing agreements
with other libraries. All evidence indicates that these pressures are likely to increase at an even
faster rate in coming years.
Fourth, there will be more emphasis at this law school on international, comparative, and foreign
law, which will place increasing demands on the collection and on public services for additional
materials and services in those areas without lessening, to any appreciable extent, the demands
on the collection and on public services for materials and services in other subject areas. Fifth, a
major shift is occurring in the nature of the sources from which users of this library derive the
information they seek. The amount of information provided in electronic format will continue to
grow and become increasingly important to Law Library users for current research purposes and
241
also to ensure their ability to operate successfully in the environment in which lawyers will
practice in the twenty-first century. Nevertheless, by volume, the primary source of new
information with respect to the law and matters closely related to law during the near future – at
least the next decade or more – will probably remain the print and microtext media; yet more and
more information of the kind that should be available in this Library will be moving to electronic
access. This means that the Law Library must support both electronic and hardcopy formats on
an acquisitions budget still based almost exclusively on past realities in which information was
acquired only in book and microtext formats. Sixth, the use of technology in legal education will
continue to grow. This includes the increasing use of Law Library based computers for student
writing, research, and for computer assisted legal instruction. Researchers often require
assistance using new technology. This means that adequate computer support services must be
provided and that the research instructional program must fully address the now pervasive need
for electronic research skills.
Seventh, the Law Library is and will remain entirely dependent upon an automated library
system for access to and maintenance of all of its records, and to support all of its daily
procedures. Finally, while borrowing information resources from other libraries will remain an
important means by which to satisfy the needs of members of the Law School and University
community for very low demand, rarely used expensive materials, the most educationally
productive posture for the Law Library remains a commitment to provide on-site immediate
access to the widest possible array of legal information resources possible because the lack of
on-site immediate access to such materials often results in a failure of Library patrons to use
them in circumstances where they should be consulted.
D. Information Resources
The University of Iowa Law Library collects legal and legally related information in all formats.
As of June 30, 2006, the information resources of the University of Iowa Law Library included a
total of 1,179,089 bound volumes and microform volume equivalents (779,501 bound volumes
and 399,588 microform volume equivalents). The formulas used for calculating microform
volume equivalents are those used by the ABA/AALS for official statistics–(microform:
volumes) microfiche 6:1 and microfilm 1:5. According to the one year old ABA/AALS Annual
Survey for June 30, 2005 the University of Iowa Law Library contained the second largest
collection of bound volumes and microform volume equivalents among all law school libraries
in the United States (sixth if only bound volumes are counted). As of June 30, 2006, the Law
Library collection contained a total of 421,377 different individually cataloged titles (308,911 in
print volumes, 108,274 in microform formats, and 4,192 in other formats). The one year old
ABA/AALS Annual Survey for June 30, 2005 indicates that among all law school libraries, this
Library had the second largest number of different individually cataloged titles in its collection,
counting together both titles in bound volumes and titles in microform formats (third if only
titles in bound volumes are counted.) As of June 30, 2006, the collection of this Law Library
contained a total of 10,233 active paid hardcopy subscriptions, including only 316 duplicate
hardcopy subscriptions for serials, continuations, periodicals, and supplements. This means that
as of June 30, 2006, this Library subscribed to 9,917 different hardcopy titles of serials,
continuations, periodicals, and supplements. According to the ABA/AALS Annual Survey for
242
June 30, 2005 this Law Library had, among all law school libraries, the fifth largest number of
different title active paid hardcopy subscriptions.
The following table based on the ABA/AALS Annual Survey Law-School statistics for June 30,
2005 depicts the informational resources collection of the University of Iowa Law Library in
relation to other major academic law libraries in this country at that time. It indicates that the
University of Iowa Law Library has one of the most comprehensive collections of on-site legal
materials in the country.
243
TABLE 6-1 ABA/AALS LIBRARY STATISTICS JUNE 30, 2005
School
Vol. &
Vol. Eq.
Held
Rank
Different
Hard &
Micro
Titles
Held
Rank
Different
Hard Titles
Held
Rank
Hard
Vols.
Held
Rank
Different
Active Serial
Titles Held
Rank
Harvard
2,192,726
1
828,559
1
779,186
1
1,723,645
1
14,905
1
IOWA
1,154,749
2
413,661
2
301,324
3
762,886
6
9,732
5
Yale
1,129,973
3
328,668
8
287,296
6
857,353
2
9,343
6
Georgetown
1,123,199
4
355,075
5
205,886
15
540,626
17
8,888
8
Columbia
1,092,534
5
376,758
4
352,592
2
857,110
3
6,243
32
NYU
1,082,282
6
292,848
13
145,960
24
778,695
4
6,575
26
Texas
1,026,598
7
379,242
3
294,665
4
770,056
5
6,339
28
Minnesota
1,020,040
8
285,280
15
233,181
12
676,758
9
10,027
4
Michigan
965,069
9
312,787
9
289,061
5
678,012
8
6,872
21
Virginia
882,770
10
275,145
17
260,265
9
622,598
11
10,074
3
244
Primary and secondary legal materials of all kinds and on all subjects and in all formats relating
to the law of the United States and its territories and every state, are collected by the Law Library
in great depth. The Library became a selective United States Government Documents
Depository in 1968. As of June 30, 2006, the Law Library collection contained 82,120 United
States Government Document titles in hard copy and 20,928 such titles in microform formats. In
addition, the Law Library has many U.S. government document titles in electronic format.
Current selections of United States Government Documents include approximately 27.12% of
the items available on the United States Government Documents Depository Plan. The Iowa
Government Documents distribution program has been largely suspended and is not expected to
be reactivated soon.
The Library‟s collection of legal materials of Great Britain and the present and former British
Commonwealth nations, especially Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and Ireland is also excellent
– one of the best in the nation. There is also a strong Indian collection, and a substantial South
African and Nigerian collection. Primary legal materials are collected for almost every major
jurisdiction within the present and former British Commonwealth. In addition, the Library has
collected many treatises and documents from these jurisdictions.
The Law Library‟s collection of materials in comparative law and international law is also
exceptionally strong. The Law Library currently receives about 1,500 scholarly journals that
concentrate on comparative, international, or foreign law, and has an estimated collection of
comparative, international, and foreign law of approximately 165,000 hardbound volumes. The
Library also has an additional substantial microform collection of such materials which includes
a complete microform collection of all available UN documents. Special efforts are being made
to maintain and expand the very strong collection of European Union materials and the Library‟s
historically strong collections of French and German legal materials. In recent years the Library
also built a substantial collection of Mexican law, and to a lesser extent a collection of
Argentinean law. Because of budgetary limitations, the Law Library does not usually acquire
materials written in foreign languages from other jurisdictions. However, where they are
available in English, the Law Library does seek to acquire a representative selection of materials
from other non-English language jurisdictions. The Library also contains a strong religious law
collection and a very strong collection of international (as well as domestic) human rights law.
In addition to the in-depth collection of American and British Commonwealth legal materials,
and the comparative, international, and foreign legal materials mentioned earlier, the Library
collects materials from the social sciences, humanities, and sciences, that are closely and directly
related to law and the Law School‟s academic program or to faculty scholarship. In light of the
increasingly interdisciplinary nature and breadth of contemporary law faculty scholarship and the
increasing availability of materials from other disciplines that are closely and directly related to
the law, the collection of cognate materials on a comprehensive basis has become essential.
However, the Law Library will not ordinarily purchase non-legal materials (materials based
primarily in other disciplines) that are not closely and directly related to the law, if the materials
may be easily obtained from another library on this campus or easily through interlibrary loan.
Although the online public access catalog shared with the other University of Iowa Libraries
facilitates access to these remotely held titles, this policy is unfortunate, and is necessary only
because of the serious financial constraints the acquisitions program of the Law Library has
245
operated under during the last twenty years and the desire of the University Central
Administration that funds it allocates to the Law Library not be used, except in cases where there
are special weighty justifications, to duplicate materials located in other libraries on this campus.
It is very hard to justify the acquisition by the Law Library under the current very difficult
financial circumstances of books that are not closely and directly related to the law that may be
helpful to legal scholarship if they may be obtained easily from the University Main Library or
its branches on this campus, or easily on interlibrary loan, when the acquisition of such books by
this Library would prevent its acquisition of legal materials not available on this campus and for
which there is a need. Of course, the Law Library will make exceptions to this general policy
when there is a need for such books that are not easily obtainable from other libraries on this
campus or by interlibrary loan or when they are so heavily and repetitively used in the Law
School as to make their acquisition a realistic necessity.
A generous private gift enabled the Library to create a comprehensive collection of fiction books
about the law, lawyers and judges, the legal system, and allied subjects, that serve the
recreational reading needs of its users campus wide for such materials and some parts of the Law
School‟s educational program. In coming years private gifts that have already been committed
will also facilitate the creation of a comprehensive collection in DVD format of movies and other
fiction material about or depicting lawyers or the legal system. When the legal fiction book
collection is combined with such a video collection, the Law Library will be able to support both
in-depth studies of the law in popular culture and the recreational needs for such materials in the
Law School and University community at large. The expectation is that these law and popular
culture collections will be wholly maintained with funds donated to the Library for this specific
purpose.
The Law Library owns two significant collections of old and rare law books. The first is a
collection of predominantly German law books that was originally owned by Professor Burkard
Wilhelm Leist (1819-1906) and his son, Gerhard Alexander Leist (1862-1918). This collection
contains about 3,300 volumes. The second is the collection of William Gardiner Hammond, who
was the first Chancellor (Dean) of the University of Iowa Law School. It contains about 1,200
volumes of early English and civil law materials. These two collections, along with several
thousand additional early and rare law books, are housed in the Rare Book Room of the Law
Library. In addition, the Library owns a collection of about 2,500 volumes of the writings by or
about all of the Presidents of the United States that was donated to the Library by Willard Boyd.
Microform materials are presently an important part of the Law Library collection. They also
constitute an important part of its ongoing acquisitions program. There are many reasons for the
growth of the Library‟s microform collection in recent years. The Law Library‟s microform
acquisitions result in enormous space savings and allow the Library to acquire materials for its
collection that would otherwise be out of print, very expensive, or in very bad physical condition.
Thus, the microform collection has dramatically increased the number and quality of research
materials available to our users. For instance, in recent years the Library purchased complete
microform collections of all available United Nations documents and the complete GATT,
World Trade Organization, and League of Nations documents. The Library also bought all of
the Eighteenth Century, Nineteenth Century, and fifteen units of the Twentieth Century Legal
Treatises microfiche collection to fill in holes as well as to supplement our holdings of some
246
print titles in poor condition. In addition, in recent years the Library acquired in microform the
Papers of the NAACP, the ACLU archive, the Indian Rights Association Papers, the Civil Rights
Congress Papers, International Human Rights Documents, Human Rights Watch Publications,
and the Records of the Fair Employment Practices Committee. Some other major microform
collections acquired in recent years include a complete retrospective collection of all bills
introduced into the U.S. Congress, Hein‟s Superseded State Statutes and Codes, Canadian Law
to 1800, both Seminaria Judicial and Diario Official from Mexico, and collections of the papers
of Justices Holmes, Brandeis, and Frankfurter.
After the purchase of newly published materials, the filling of gaps in the information resources
collection is a high acquisitions priority. Despite the fact that this Law Library has one of the
most comprehensive American, British Commonwealth, comparative, and international law
research collections in the country, it contains significant gaps that need to be filled. The growth
of microform publications and more recently electronic database collections containing full runs
of materials no longer in print is making retrospective gap filling more possible today than in
prior years. However, the purchase of these materials is expensive. In order to make these
collections more accessible, the Law Library also seeks to either purchase set cataloging or to
locally catalog each of the individual separate titles within a set. Either alternative requires
substantial financial outlays and personnel time; but the Library has made great progress in this
regard, having cataloged as of June 30, 2006, a total of 108,274 different microform titles and
4,192 different other format (non-book) titles.
Electronic databases are a very important and very fast growing part of the informational
resources of this Library. During the 2005-06 year the Law Library spent $143,377 for
electronic databases and in the 2006-2007 year the Law Library expects to spend about $224,500
for electronic databases. Most of the money to pay for electronic databases in the Law Library
comes from a special law student computing fee and is in addition to the regular Law Library
acquisitions budget for books, periodicals, continuations, and microforms. The Law Library
subscribes to Lexis/Nexis, Westlaw, and a significant number of other online legal databases
including HeinOnline, SSRN, BNA-ALL, Index to Legal Periodicals Web/and Retrospective,
Legal Journals Index, LegalTrac, Global Legal Information Network, CCH Business and
Finance, Readex Congressional Serial Set, Foreign Law Guide, LLMC Digital, Oceana Treaties,
CCH Health Policy Tracking, RIA Checkpoint, and many others. During the current fiscal year
(2006-2007) the Law Library also purchased a searchable electronic database called The Making
of Modern Law that contains 22,000 legal treatises published between 1800-1926. In addition, it
purchased another searchable electronic database containing all United States Supreme Court
briefs and records for the period 1832-1978. Because these Law Library subscriptions to
electronic databases are principally financed by a special law student computing fee, access to
these databases is limited to members of the Law School community unless the vendor permits
campus wide access at no extra cost to the Law Library. Recently, the Law Library purchased a
proxy server to make all databases purchased by the Law Library available to law students and
law faculty from remote locations. During the 2005-2006 school year, law students at this
school used 37,031 hours on Westlaw, and 14,586 hours on Lexis.
247
The Law Library and the University Libraries maintain and use a single online electronic catalog
system (Infohawk) which provides public access to all titles housed in the Law Library and also
all titles in the collections of the University Libraries, including Government Documents.
Infohawk also provides direct access for all members of the Law School community both in the
Law Library and from remote locations to the bibliographic records of all the materials held in
the Center for Research Libraries in Chicago, to the online catalog of all other CIC schools, and
to the OCLC and RLIN database. In addition, Infohawk provides direct access for all members
of the Law School community both in the Law Library and from remote locations to a large
number of other online academic databases entirely paid for by University Libraries including
JSTOR, KLUWER, EBSCO HOST, Academic Search Elite, PAIS International, Global Health,
Medline, CQ Electronic Library, Early English Books Online, Wilson Web, Eighteenth Century
Collections Online, and the Nineteenth Century Masterfile.
The Law Library maintains various CD-ROM databases and three public CD-ROM
workstations. One workstation in the reference area contains indexes for accessing periodicals
and UN documents. Two additional workstations are located in the Audiovisual Room. They
are connected to the Internet by the LAN. These three workstations are used to access
commercial CDs and U.S. Government CDs stored in the Audiovisual Room. Networked access
to these electronic resources would be desirable so that access can be distributed throughout the
College.
The acquisition policies of the Law Library are directed at collecting information resources in all
formats that will be beneficial to its users in the Law School and University communities, and
that will enhance the integrity of the Law Library collection as a whole. To the extent
practicable and useful, efforts are made on an ongoing basis to consult with individual faculty
members about the acquisition and deacquisition of materials in their respective fields. The Law
Library [Information Resources] Acquisition Policies and Collection Development Guidelines
document is updated periodically and is reviewed periodically by the Library staff and
administration and the Law School Internal Procedures Committee. It was last reviewed and
approved by that Law School committee on February 1, 2006. See Appendix 6-2.
The major problem currently facing the University of Iowa Law Library in relation to the
maintenance and enhancement of its collection of information resources is financial. As noted in
the discussion of the statistics describing its collection in absolute and relative terms, this Library
contains one of the most comprehensive, in-depth, legal research collections in any law school
library in the United States. However, the future quality of its collection is in danger because of
an inadequate acquisitions budget. That budget has become insufficient in recent years because
of runaway inflation in the prices of law books and other information resources, the unfavorable
rate of foreign exchange for the United States dollar, the explosive increase in the number of new
law related titles published each year as compared to prior years, and the need to collect
information in new electronic formats without wholly abandoning the collection of information
in the more traditional book and microform formats. It should be stressed that the Law Library
expects in the future to obtain substantially increasing amounts of information desired by its
users through electronic formats and, therefore, to be spending substantially increasing amounts
of money for information in electronic formats. At the same time, as noted in Section C of this
248
Law Library Self Study, in the near future – at least during the next decade or more – the Law
Library does not expect the quantity of new legal and legally related information available only
in print to decline, so its costs of acquiring necessary print materials are also likely to continue to
rise significantly as recent history demonstrates. Financing the increasing costs of new
electronic information as it becomes available and also for the near future the costs of new print
and microform information will significantly strain the financial resources of the Law Library.
In order to maximize the amount of information on-site in the Law Library within existing
budget constraints, the Law Library usually acquires new information in the cheapest format
unless there are good reasons to purchase it in another format or to purchase it in more than one
format.
Law schools with lesser library information resource collections and less ambitious institutional
objectives might be satisfied with the current acquisitions budget of this library. But the Law
School is not satisfied with a Law Library acquisitions budget that is insufficient to maintain,
with all of the necessary annual supplementation, one of the very best legal research collections
in the United States; it also is not satisfied with a Law Library acquisitions budget that is
insufficient to keep up in any reasonable way with the recent explosive increase in the cost and
number of new law and law related information resources published each year.
According to the recently adopted Law Library Strategic Plan, (See Appendix 6-1), the first
objective of the Law Library should be to ensure the continued collection and growth in this
Library of the hardcopy, microform, and electronic information necessary to serve the traditional
and interdisciplinary, national and international, teaching and research activities in the Law
School, and the legal research needs of the University community as a whole, and to maintain its
position as one of the very best on-site law school information resource collections in the United
States. It is clear that a lack of adequate funds will seriously frustrate efforts to implement this
objective and has caused a deterioration in certain aspects of the quality of the collection of such
materials currently in the Library.
Between 1984 and 2004 the overall prices of the books, periodicals, continuations, and
microforms purchased by the Law Library increased cumulatively by at least 300%. Since the
1984-85 Law Library recurring acquisitions budgets was $713,988 and the 2004-2005 recurring
acquisitions budget was $2,177,392, the actual annual current purchasing power of the Law
Library acquisitions budget has declined by about $678,560 during those twenty years.
[$713,988 (budget 84-85) x 400% (100% of 1984-85 budget + 300% inflation) = $2,855,952 $2,177,392 (2004-05 budget) = $678,560] (The subsequent 2005-2006 acquisitions budget
increased by only 5% and was $2,291,592 and the 2006-2007 budget increased by only 5% and
is $2,411,592 while the overall average annual inflation rate for the prices of informational
resources purchased by this library in the period since 2004 was about 12%!) The current
acquisitions budget figures noted above include $50,000 which has been transferred each year
during the last decade to that budget from the Law Library general expense budget in recognition
of the inadequate funding of the acquisitions budget and the very high priority this Library places
on collection development. In addition, where possible, the Law Library transfers any unused
salary funds in a particular year to the information resources acquisition budget, again, because it
places a very high priority on collection development in all formats and the annual increases in
249
the budget for the acquisition of new information resources has been substantially less than the
annual increase in prices by the vendors of such materials.
This high cumulative inflationary increase in the cost of information resource materials
purchased by the Library has been due to many factors and is a product of average price
increases by law and law related publishers over the last twenty-two years of almost twelve
percent per year, and the decline in the last three or four years of the value of the dollar against
the Euro, British Pound, and Canadian dollar, foreign currencies that must be used to purchase
about a quarter of the materials purchased by the Library each year. There is no doubt that the
excessive inflationary price increases imposed by publishers during the last twenty-two years is
caused in substantial part by the increasing consolidation of enterprises in the publishing industry
and the fact that purchasers like this library have no choice (if they can find the funds) about
whether to purchase unique information publishers offer on or related to the law because their
students, faculty, and public patrons need that information. The excessive inflationary price
increases in publications purchased by this library also seem to be in part a product of the fact
that publishers seem to prefer to make whatever profit they can from the sale of a fewer number
of high priced items than a larger number of lower priced items and that the primary market for a
large number of the items purchased by this law library is among practicing lawyers who can,
more easily than this library, pass some or all of those increasing costs along to their clients.
A substantial restoration of the recurring annual Law Library acquisitions budget for information
resources in all formats to the total purchasing power it had in 1984-85 is essential to accomplish
effectively the mission of the Law Library and the goals set by the Law Library and the Law
School. As noted, a substantial restoration of the recurring acquisitions budget to a financially
adequate footing would have required, as of July 1, 2006, a total annual increase of at least
$678,560 over the current annual acquisitions budget to redress the drastic loss of purchasing
power during the last twenty-two years.
There is ample evidence to demonstrate that the overall quality of the Law Library collection is
suffering significantly because of an inadequate acquisitions budget. Between 1984 and 2006 the
number of new volumes and volume equivalents published each year of the kind necessary to
support the academic program of this Law School increased enormously as compared to prior
years. Consequently, in recent years the Law Library has been unable to purchase many
thousands of new volumes and volume equivalents that are essential to faculty and student
research needs. Since 1984, the Law Library has had to cancel several thousand standing orders
for subscriptions it had to serials, periodicals, continuations, newsletters, and updates, and has
had to reduce the frequency of its purchase of supplementation to many secondary materials
already in the Law Library. This has resulted in this library‟s very large collection of updated
secondary materials being much less current than it needs to be in a rapidly changing field such
as law where current information is absolutely essential for both academic and professional
purposes. Insufficient funding has also caused the Library to discontinue, over the protest of
many of its users, the collection of virtually all newsletters and similar practice oriented services
of only short term or temporary value that report summaries of recent cases and developments in
specified areas of the law. It has also caused the Library to reduce the number of copies of some
items below the number that is optimum. So, for example, in the period between August 2005
250
and December 2006, a period of less than a year and a half, the Law Library had to cancel about
$125,000 in subscriptions to serials, continuations, periodicals, and updates, because of the gap
between the annual 5% increase in funding to purchase such materials and the annual average
12% increase in the prices charged for such materials.
Something must be done to increase significantly the acquisitions budget of the Law Library so
that any further deterioration in the quality of its outstanding collection is halted, so that some of
the materials that could not be acquired in recent years are retrospectively added to the
collection, so that the updates and supplementation to secondary materials in the Library can be
kept as up-to-date as possible, and so that this Library can maintain its information resources
collection as one of the most comprehensive in-depth collections among all American law school
libraries. In addition, further resources are needed to expand significantly Library information
resources in areas in which faculty and student interest has recently increased substantially, as
well as in entirely new areas of their interest.
For example, as a result of the rapidly changing circumstances of the world in which we live,
during the last twenty years a large number of faculty and students at this law school have
become especially interested in international, comparative, and foreign law studies, including the
development of supra-national governing structures and entities. The rise of global trade, the
growth and importance of international organizations and the European Union, the increasing
international migrations of people, the growth of international terrorism, the enhanced concerns
about human rights throughout the world, have all contributed to increased student and faculty
interest in all parts of the University in international and foreign legal materials related to these
phenomenon. As a result, such studies will be of even greater significance in the future to law
students at this institution and to students elsewhere in the University because of the rapidly
increasing interdependence of the United States and its legal system with other nations and
supra-national bodies and their legal systems. Because of this phenomenon, the Law School
established an LL.M. program in international and comparative law. Consequently, even though
the Law Library collections in these areas are already very substantial, significantly increased
efforts must be made to maintain and expand its collections in these areas. That will be costly
because materials on these particular subjects tend to be even more expensive than domestic
American legal materials, and the United States dollar has, in recent years, been a very weak
currency as compared to those foreign currencies with which many of these materials must be
purchased. Another related example is the fact that a number of faculty members and an
increasing number of students in the Law School and elsewhere in the University are now
interested in Latin American law. The importance of Latin-American legal systems is also likely
to increase in light of the North American Free Trade Agreement, the Central American Free
Trade Agreement, and the large Latino population in the United States and the growing Latino
population in this state and University. Yet, this library only contains materials on Mexican law,
and to a lesser extent on Argentinean law, and resources are not available to collect even basic
materials from any other Latin-American jurisdiction.
The Law School Administration and Law Library Administration have made continuing efforts
to raise from alumni and from other sources additional funds to augment the Law Library budget
for the acquisition of information resources. These efforts have enabled the Law Library to
251
enrich its collections significantly such as by the addition of microform collections of all U.N.
Documents, the papers of Justices Holmes, Brandeis, and Frankfurter, a historical collection of
all compiled state codes, a collection of ACLU archive documents, a collection of books, and a
future collection of DVDs, containing works of fiction about the law, lawyers, and the legal
system. Efforts to raise private funds to enhance the acquisition of information resources in all
formats will continue.
In order to augment its information resources and deal with problems raised by inadequate
acquisitions funding, the Law Library has mounted an especially aggressive effort to obtain from
private persons and public or private institutions at no cost, or only for the cost of shipping from
the donor, collections of books that would enhance the breadth, depth, and completeness of its
information resources assets. During the last dozen years, the Law Library has been very
successful in obtaining major gifts of books filling gaps in its collection from various individuals
and public and private institutions across the country who, for one reason or another, were
willing to entrust them to this institution for no cost or only for the cost of shipping. Almost
40,000 bound volumes that filled in gaps in the Law Library‟s collection or otherwise
significantly enhanced the quality or scope of the collection were added during the last dozen
years as a result of these efforts.
In 2005-06, the Law Library sought to borrow from other libraries 758 items and received
requests from other libraries for 1,888 items. In this same period, the Library actually obtained
from other libraries on interlibrary loan 758 items and actually lent to other libraries on
interlibrary loan 895 items. Consequently, during that year this library filled 47% of the loan
requests it received and obtained from other libraries 100% of the items it requested from them.
It should also be noted that the Iowa Law Library was a net lender not a net borrower of
information resources from other libraries. In the future, it is clear that this library will have to
rely more on interlibrary loans than it has in the past, and will increasingly have to depend on
other libraries for materials it can no longer afford to buy. However, if reliance on interlibrary
loans for materials increases very substantially, faculty and students will be much less promptly
served than they have been in the past. In that case, they may be less satisfied with this library
and may, therefore, find this law school less attractive than it was in earlier years.
Because the University of Iowa is a member of the CIC, library patrons at any library on this
campus, including the Law Library, may search the online catalogs of all other CIC member
institutions and access a wide variety of catalogs, indexes, abstracts, and reference sources
provided by CIC institutions. The CIC has also negotiated several important contracts for
electronic databases that are shared among its members at considerable savings when compared
with the costs each of them would have incurred had these databases been purchased by the
members individually.
All items added to the Law Library collection, including government documents, are fully
cataloged. Cataloging of new titles in the Law Library is extremely current. Almost all new titles
are cataloged within six months of receipt (exceptions include titles in non-roman script and
unique materials). This represents a turn-around time significantly faster than that reported by
our peer institutions. New United States Government Documents are fully cataloged using
252
Marcive as an outsourcing cataloging service. The Library completed a project to retrospectively
convert all older Government Document titles in its collection. In addition to accessing such
documents through the University online catalog, access to them can be obtained through the
traditional United States Government Documents Monthly Catalog Index. Hard copy Iowa
Government documents are fully cataloged, but microform Iowa Government Documents are
only short title cataloged. Unfortunately, the Iowa depository program has been largely
suspended and is not expected to be reactivated soon.
In 1984-86 the Law Library converted all of its bibliographic records into machine readable
cataloging format so that it could convert to a fully automated library system. This retrospective
conversion project permitted the entire LC and Hicks classified collection of the Law Library to
be available online when the University of Iowa online catalog was introduced in August 1987.
All Government Documents titles were accessible with the completion of a subsequent
retrospective conversion project in 1999. In addition, the Library completed a conversion of
internal manual holdings records so that details regarding the specific serial volumes held and the
currency of supplementation and updates are available in its online catalog. Iowa was among the
first of the largest law school libraries to complete such retrospective data conversion projects.
In 1971 the Law Library began to convert its collection from a modified Hicks classification
system to the Library of Congress American Law (KF) System. Conversion to the Library of
Congress classification system was deemed advantageous for four reasons: first, to take
advantage of the more orderly shelving of treatises with corporate authors; second, to facilitate a
subject matter browsing capability; third, to bring together on a state-by-state basis the statutes,
codes, reports, and treatises of each jurisdiction; and fourth, to facilitate easy access to
periodicals that have undergone one or more name changes. In this Library LC classification of
the collection is now virtually complete. New LC schedules are adopted when released and all
currently released schedules are in active use. The Library is completing a final reclassification
project to reclassify religious system materials from Hicks to LC. Recently the Library of
Congress significantly revised the schedules for Political Science, creating a new schedule for
international law (JZ) which is to replace the older JX class. At the same time a new schedule
for the Law of Nations (KZ) was devised. Although these new LC schedules are already in use
in this library for new materials, the Library has not yet undertaken a full reclassification of all of
its existing JX materials.
The automated catalog system “Infohawk” used by the University of Iowa Law Library is used
by all University of Iowa libraries and was selected by a University-wide committee which
included Law Library representatives. It is a fully integrated library system and supports
collection access and control for all of the libraries on campus, including the Law Library. This
integrated system is designed around a group of products vended by the Ex Libris Corporation.
The campus currently has licenses to the Aleph 500 integrated library system; to SFX, an
electronic resources link manager/resolver; for Metalib portal management software; and
Digitool, a digital asset management system. All expenses for the operation and maintenance of
these Ex Libris products which run Infohawk, the University of Iowa automated library system
used by the Law Library, are paid for by the University of Iowa Central Administration directly,
so none of those expenses are charged to the budget of the Law Library.
253
Cooperation in the selection and creation of a single, integrated, automated library system for all
University of Iowa libraries has been beneficial to the Law Library for collection development as
well as for reference and support for emerging technologies. A single integrated system helps
the Law Library avoid unnecessary duplication of materials available in other University of Iowa
libraries and permits people in the Law Library to access all databases to which the University
Libraries subscribe. The current automated library system offers the following functions: public
access online catalog, acquisitions, fund accounting (including an online payment interface),
cataloging, serials check-in, and online circulation. It also includes a web interface for users, a
graphical user interface for staff, and, as noted, hot links to many external information resources.
The University of Iowa joined the Research Libraries Group in May 1979. The Law Library
used the RLIN system for cataloging between 1980 and 1995. In 1995, after an exhaustive
comparative study, the Library‟s cataloging activity was transferred to OCLC. Nevertheless, the
Law Library continues to use the RLIN interlibrary loan service when helpful. Because of the
high cost of RLIN‟s interlibrary loan structure, the Library has been using the CIC interlibrary
loan system, which is free for borrowing most items, relying on the RLIN interlibrary loan
system primarily for materials unavailable through the CIC system. Since 1995, the OCLC
interlibrary loan service has also been available to the Law Library‟s users. RLIN and OCLC
complement each other so the Law Library can borrow from major research collections that use
each of the two systems. OCLC also serves as the primary source of cooperative cataloging that
is used in creating records that describe particular holdings in this library‟s collection. Infohawk
permits online transfer of such OCLC records into this library‟s local system. The merger of
RLIN and OCLC will hopefully enhance and simplify some Law Library cataloging, borrowing,
and lending activities in the future and reduce their costs. The merger will also provide an
opportunity to load the Library‟s retrospective holdings, now only available through the RLIN
database, into the OCLC database. The Law Library currently creates a monthly selected
acquisitions list of newly cataloged titles that is posted on the Law Library web site and,
therefore, readily available to all faculty and students.
Since 1991 the Law Library has been attempting to add full cataloging for each of the many
individual, separate titles contained in its large retrospective microform collections by
purchasing them, where available, from a variety of external vendors. As noted earlier, the
purpose of this effort is to provide better access for library patrons to the full resources of its
collection. To date 28,600 individual cataloging records have been loaded into the Library‟s
local database, including full set cataloging for the following sets: 19th Century Legal Treatises,
International Law, Civil Law I and II, selected Major Studies of the Congressional Reserve
Service, Canon Law, Native American Legal Materials, selected units of the Papers of the
NAACP, Legal Theses and Dissertations, and U.S. Military law. Availability of set cataloging is
evaluated annually; additional records are purchased as they become available in completed
form. Further efforts are underway to ensure, to the extent feasible and practicable, local
cataloging for each of the individual titles contained in other retrospective microform collections
owned by the Library.
254
The bindery budget of the Law Library, which is only $30,000 per year, has not increased in
several years. This has created a growing preservation concern. Because of inadequate funds for
binding, more and more titles in the Library‟s collection are going onto the shelves in paper
bindings, which is likely to jeopardize their long term durability. Conservation efforts must also
be made to preserve the older parts of the Library‟s collection and other volumes in the
collection that do not have long term durable bindings. All such efforts will require additional
funds. For example, this library owns an almost complete run in hardcopy of Eighth Circuit
Court of Appeal briefs – probably the most complete such set available. However, this set is
unbound, the briefs in individual cases are simply tied together and placed in order on the
shelves. To preserve this unique archive and protect individual briefs from loss, the whole
collection should be bound. This is likely to cost at least $80,000. Efforts to raise money for this
project privately have so far been unsuccessful and public monies are not available to finance it.
E. Educational Program and Service Activities
The formal teaching effort of the Law Library occurs in three courses. First, Reference
Librarians provide all law students with year long introductory legal research instruction as part
of the first year required Legal Analysis, Writing, and Research (LAWR) course. The legal
research instruction provided by Reference Librarians as part of that course which is taught by
LAWR instructors is intended to teach basic legal research skills. It focuses on the use of basic
print and online resources and on the research skills to use those resources effectively. While the
legal research portions of the first year LAWR course do not receive any separate academic
credit, students must satisfactorily complete them in order to receive credit from the LAWR
instructors for the LAWR course. Second, the Law Library also offers an Advanced Legal
Research course for second and third year law students and graduate law students. In this
elective course students review and expand their knowledge of basic print and online resources
and develop their ability to plan effective research strategies through the completion of numerous
class assignments calculated to teach that skill. Third, the Law Library offers an elective course
in Foreign, Comparative, and International Law research methods to second and third year law
students and graduate law students.
The precise role of the Law Library staff in teaching legal research methods as a part of the
newly instituted LAWR program is a work in progress because the program is new. (It started
this academic year.) However, the Law Library staff involved, the LAWR instructors, and the
Law School faculty, are agreed that in this course the Law Library staff will teach basic legal
research skills in both print and online formats at the most appropriate time in a student‟s
academic career, and will teach those skills in the most effective and useful ways possible. The
goal of the legal research instruction – to teach the appropriate skills at the appropriate time – is
addressed by offering the appropriate legal research instruction sessions during each of the first
two semesters at a time that coincides with the assignment of writing assignments in the LAWR
course involving those particular skills. For example, the instruction session by Library staff on
locating cases is timed to coincide with the memo assignment that requires students to find and
analyze several cases. So, also, fundamentals of cases, statutes, the use of their finding tools, and
updating techniques are taught in the fall, because these are the building blocks for the fall
writing assignments. Effective research strategies, secondary resources, legislative history, and
255
administrative law resources are the focus of the spring semester legal research instruction
sessions because the writing assignments during that semester are broader in scope. Librarians
work closely with LAWR instructors during both semesters to ensure that the legal research
sessions cover the skills necessary to help students perform their current writing assignment.
Recent practice has been that students receive their Westlaw and Lexis training following the
completion of their Small Section writing assignments in the second semester of their first year.
This policy was established by faculty action a number of years ago. However, the
establishment of the new LAWR program has changed this. Westlaw, Lexis, and other online
research resource training is now integrated throughout the first year as part of the legal research
skills instruction in the LAWR course, rather than in group training sessions later. This is an
attempt to provide all students with first year training in the use of the best resource for a
particular research need, rather than timing the training they receive in a research skill based
solely on the format of available resources. By integrating both print and electronic resource
research skill training throughout the first year, students will improve their research skills, and be
better prepared to approach research assignments with the most effective and appropriate
strategies.
Reference Librarians offer a two credit, pass/fail, Advanced Legal Research course. It has been
offered each spring semester and also during the summer session, and is open to second and third
year students. In the summer of 2006 one section of this course was offered during each of the
two summer sessions. One Reference Librarian coordinates the course which is taught with
assistance from other Reference Librarians who take responsibility for specific units and/or class
sessions. Enrollment is limited to thirty students during the regular school year and to fifteen
students during the shorter summer sessions because of a consensus that the course cannot be
taught effectively with a larger number of students at those respective times. Topics covered in
the course include a review of the basic sources of legal information, techniques for accessing
desired information, and the development of research strategies for managing information.
Students also receive advanced training in Lexis and Westlaw in the course and are exposed to
other electronic sources of legal information, especially those accessible through the Internet.
Instruction techniques include lecture and supervised hard copy and electronic research
assignments that require students to use the resources discussed in the course. The final exam is
a research problem that must be performed in the Library using the resources explored in the
course. Student response to this advanced legal research teaching effort has been very positive.
Each year there has been a waiting list of students desiring to take the course. It would seem
desirable, therefore, to add at least one more section of this Advanced Legal Research course
during each academic year to accommodate, to the extent possible, all of the student demand for
the course. In addition, each year the Foreign, Comparative, and International Law Librarian
teaches an elective one credit, pass/fail course dealing with research methods and sources in
those subjects. This course explores both print and electronic sources and is open to second and
third year law students and graduate law students.
The Law Library Reference staff also offers informal refresher legal research classes late in the
spring semester to all students who may wish to attend. The emphasis in these classes is to
prepare the students for summer positions as summer associates. Usually there are four such
256
sessions, and although the specific topics covered vary somewhat from year to year, the topics
generally include statutory research, digests for locating case law, an introduction to practice
materials, an introduction to Iowa practice materials, and an introduction to the Internet as a
resource for finding legal information. Attendance at these refresher classes has varied from a
handful of students to as many as twenty-five or thirty students. In response to faculty requests,
members of the Reference Department also have provided specialized research instruction
sessions in recent years in connection with specific courses on journalism, Native American law,
bankruptcy, human rights, international law, international family law, global employment
discrimination, gender and constitutional history, professional responsibility, Islamic law, health
policy, tax law, and Law of the Frontier. They also have provided special research instruction
sessions for LL.M. students and for students working on law journals, in the legal clinic
program, and in the Jessup Moot Court program. Finally, an annual legal research session for
faculty research assistants was recently introduced.
In recent years the formal in-class teaching responsibilities of the Reference Librarians have
expanded significantly. As noted, in addition to the basic legal research skills taught to first year
students as part of the newly instituted LAWR program, Reference Librarians now regularly
teach each year two or three sections of an Advanced Legal Research course, and the Foreign,
Comparative, and International Law Librarian teaches each year a course on research methods in
those subjects. Although the Reference Librarians are committed to the formal legal research
instructional program which involves the teaching of both electronic and hardcopy research
skills, and believe that this program needs further development, current staffing levels impose
some limits on the Library‟s ability to expand the existing program despite the fact that the
student demand for such instruction continues to grow. However, as noted below, the recent
addition of a full-time Head Student Computer Services Librarian whose primary focus will be to
teach students electronic legal research skills in various settings should permit some significant
expansion in the quantity, scope, and nature of such teaching.
The recently added full-time Head Student Computer Services Librarian should enable the Law
Library to expand its role as a teacher of electronic legal research skills by offering students a
larger number of opportunities for instruction in legal research skills that focus on electronic
legal research methods and strategies. In the past the Law Library regularly offered law students
only two sections of the Advanced Legal Research survey course which covers both hardcopy
and electronic research and would like to offer regularly at least three sections of this course each
year; and the Law Library currently does not offer on a regular basis electronic and hardcopy
research skills mini-courses on specialized domestic law or interdisciplinary subjects and would
like to offer at least six such courses each year. This new librarian will enable the Library to
expand the teaching of both electronic and hardcopy legal and interdisciplinary research skills to
satisfy these demonstrated needs. In addition, this new librarian should enable the Library to
facilitate the further integration of electronic and hardcopy research skills teaching into particular
substantive courses in which faculty members desire such instruction.
The Reference Librarians in the Law Library also do a great deal of informal teaching in the
form of individual reference assistance. The Law Library provides ninety-one hours per week of
257
regular reference service to its users, ranking it seventh among all academic law libraries in the
weekly hours of such service according to the 2005-06 ABA/AALS statistics.
In addition to the formal instructional program, the informal small group teaching, and the
informal individualized reference assistance, Reference Librarians provide bibliographies of
prospective faculty candidates to the Faculty Recruitment Committee. Reference Librarians also
compile and issue annually a complete Faculty Bibliography of all of the scholarly writings of
each full-time, permanent Law School faculty member. See Appendix 3-3. This bibliography for
each faculty member is available on the Law School web site as well as in print. It is updated
online quarterly. Special efforts are also made to route new materials to faculty members who are
known to have a special interest in the particular subject involved. (With some limitations, the
Law Library regularly routes up to ten serial titles to individual faculty members at their request.)
In addition, the Law Library staff helps faculty obtain from other campus libraries any materials
they need for their research. The Dean‟s office also pays for two law students who are hired by
the Library to perform document retrieval and delivery services for the faculty and to perform
other small research projects for the faculty as assigned by their supervising librarian. These
positions have been a great help to the faculty and as additional resources for this purpose
become available from the Dean‟s office, more Library based faculty research assistants should
be hired for this purpose. The University Libraries system also cooperates with the Law Library
to provide courier service from other campus libraries for the delivery of materials to the Law
Library. Items requested one day are typically delivered in a day, although Friday or weekend
requests are delivered on Monday. This service is available to faculty only. University Libraries
also has a photocopy delivery service available to all faculty including Law School faculty. Of
course, the Law Library regularly obtains materials needed by its patrons on interlibrary loan
from the libraries of other institutions throughout the country.
Although Reference Librarians respond to faculty reference requests as received, inadequate
staffing precludes them from routinely doing in-depth research for faculty that requires a
significant amount of time. Such research for a particular faculty member must currently be
done primarily by the College paid student research assistants assigned to that particular faculty
member. This is unfortunate, since the Library would like its own professional reference staff to
increase the individualized in-depth research services available to support the research of
particular faculty members. The Law Library would also like to provide the faculty of the
College with more personal and immediate pickup from and delivery to their offices of Library
materials than permitted currently by the two faculty student research assistants located in the
Law Library and paid for by the Dean‟s office. However, the Library is unable to provide these
additional services from its own funds because the very serious resource constraints under which
it currently operates would require the Library to reduce or abandon other higher priority
services to accomplish these tasks. Hopefully the Dean‟s office will be able, at some time in the
near future, to increase the number of faculty research assistants it pays for that are located in the
Library and dedicated to this function.
Other public services activities of the Library currently include the preparation of a monthly list
of new items acquired by the Library that may be viewed by patrons on the Library web site, and
special displays that are prepared in connection with visits to the Law School of distinguished
258
individuals or other significant events. When requested, the Library‟s Special Services also
provides for a fee calculated to recover all of its costs photocopies of Law Library materials to
members of the bench and bar, to government bodies, and to other libraries with whom this
library does not have a reciprocal agreement for the provision of such materials on a cost free
basis. In 2005-06, Special Services responded to 316 requests from such persons and institutions
and provided them with 5,726 pages of photocopied Law Library materials.
It should be stressed that the Law Library is heavily used by the whole University of Iowa
community of faculty and students because it is the Law Library for the whole University not
just for the Law School. Reference Librarians give numerous Law Library tours to classes in
other parts of the University and provide reference help to many students and faculty in other
parts of the University, as well as to members of the public. It is not surprising, therefore, that
the gate count (number of people entering the Law Library) rose from 595,667 in 1995-1996 to
602,111 in 2004-2005, and that the number of items from the Law Library collection that were
checked out of the Library to users increased from 29,644 in 1995-1996 to 35,566 in 2004-2005.
(This should be compared to a decline in the gate count in the other libraries on this campus of
10% during this period, and a decline in the on-site use of library materials of 70% during this
period in the other libraries on this campus.)
F. Physical Facilities
The Law School building was completed in 1986. The Law Library occupies 76,591 net square
feet of that building. The portion of the building occupied by the Law Library was well designed
and generally allows the Library to function effectively. In general, it also provides users a
hospitable and functional environment. However, as noted shortly, there are now some serious
facilities problems that the Library will have to deal with in the near future. Except for access by
faculty through two locked, alarmed doors on the fourth floor and an elevator, all ingress and
egress to the Law Library is on the second floor (the main floor) which is equipped with a 3M
Tattletape System.
The Law Library is housed on four levels: level 3 contains state materials, a core collection, and
the rare books collection; level 2 contains a core collection and Anglo-American Periodicals;
level 1 contains American law materials including the tax collection; and level G contains
Government Documents and all of the Comparative, International, and Foreign Law materials,
including such periodicals. The Library uses the concept of a “core collection” for basic
American primary materials. The National Reporter System, the American Law Reports, the
United States Codes (all three publications), and CFR are available in each of the two designated
“core collection” areas – one on the second floor and one on the third floor.
The Law Library is open for one hundred and six hours each week when school is in session, and
for sixty-seven hours per week during the four weeks each year when school is not in session. In
addition, the Law Library is open additional hours before and during the exam period. When the
Library is closed, only faculty have access to the facilities and resources of the Library. A few
students have requested that the Library be open longer hours. However, this Library is already
open at least as many hours per week as most law school libraries; current Law Library staff
259
resources are not available to expand the number of hours it is open each week; and, based on
past usage data, the actual demand for opening during the specific hours the Library is now
closed is likely to be extremely small. According to the ABA/AALS Statistics for June 30, 2005,
among the law school libraries with the ten largest collections of information resources (see
Table 6-1, Section D), the Iowa Law Library ranks sixth in the number of hours it is open per
week (106). These statistics indicate that among these largest law school libraries: the Yale Law
Library ranks first (133 hours per week), the Harvard Law Library ranks second (126 hours per
week), the Texas Law Library ranks ninth (98 hours per week), and the Minnesota Law Library
ranks tenth (83 hours per week). It should be stressed that the ABA/AALS Statistics for June 30,
2005 indicate that the Harvard Law Library (97) and the Yale Law Library (43) have much
larger staffs than the Iowa Law Library (32.5).
The Library has about 119,689 linear feet of shelving; about 98,145 feet were occupied on June
30, 2006 and about 21,544 were vacant. According to conventional library standards, shelving is
considered full at 85% of capacity because of the impossibility of shifting materials every time
new materials are added. Library shelving is currently about 82% full despite the fact that in
2001 the basement shelving of the Law Library was converted to compact shelving containing
about 11,000 linear feet of useable shelving space. The collection is growing by about 20,000
bound volumes each year. The Library can house about 950,000 bound volumes and it currently
contains about 779,501 bound volumes. This means that the shelving capacity of the Law
Library will be functionally full (about 85% full) by the end of the year 2007. Obviously,
something must be done immediately to ensure that a crisis in shelving space does not occur.
The best intermediate solution to this space problem from the point of the Law Library users and
staff would be the creation of an off-site storage facility for lesser used hardcopy materials with
daily delivery of materials stored off-site to the Law Library. The planning for such a facility to
serve the off-site storage needs of both the Law Library and University Libraries is already
underway and the project has the full support of the University Central Administration. The
Board of Regents governing the University recently approved the University going forward with
the detailed planning for this project.
The seating capacity in the Law Library is adequate for the needs of the approximately 675 law
students that are intended to be enrolled normally at this law school. In recent years, however,
the first year class has often ended up larger than the goals of the admissions process and,
therefore, the total number of law students in the building has exceeded 700. In addition, the
number of LL.M. students and joint degree students at the College is growing. As a result, in
some years individual carrels have not been available for all second and third year students and
LL.M. students despite the intention of the College to provide each such student with his or her
own individual carrel. In years with normal enrollments of no more than 675, most second and
third year law students and LL.M. students are assigned for their own use an individual study
carrel in the Library or in one of the co-curricular Law School activity offices. Within the Law
Library, there are currently 381 student study carrels for individual students. These carrels are
currently allocated only to second and third year students and LL.M. students who sign up for an
individual library carrel on a first come first served basis at the start of each semester. The
assignment of individual student carrels only to second and third year law students rather than to
first and second year students should be reconsidered by the faculty in light of the comparative
260
needs of students in each of the three years of law school. In light of the larger number of law
students during several recent years and the likelihood of a recurrence some additional student
carrel space would be desirable. Beside the student carrels, the Library contains 213 seats at
tables designed for general study and research. Currently, first year law students and other
Library patrons use seats at tables, or if the assigned second or third year or LL.M. occupant is
not using it at the time, a vacant carrel. The Library also contains twenty-five soft seats and
thirty seats for index tables and reference materials. In addition, the Library contains thirty-eight
closed carrels for faculty use and twenty-two closed carrels for computers and special needs
students. Wiring has been installed to provide online access from each of the 441 carrels in the
Law Library to the Internet, Westlaw, Lexis, other databases subscribed to by the Law Library
and University Libraries, and the University online catalog. In addition, a wireless system has
been installed so that patrons using the large tables in the Law Library can access these
resources.
Current carrel space for faculty and visitors to the Law Library who wish to use its facilities for
weeks, months, or a year is also currently inadequate. There are thirty-eight closed carrels in the
Law Library for faculty while the full-time faculty of the College is currently over fifty. The
Law School also currently hosts as many as eight to ten foreign visitors each year who wish to do
research for a period in this Library and faculty in other parts of this University or from other
Universities who wish to use this Library for an extended period. In addition, in the future the
Law School should consider hosting summer conferences for faculty from other Law Schools or
faculty from other disciplines in other Universities that focus on the use of the outstanding
resources in this library. All of these people should have available to them closed carrels in the
Library for the time they are using it; but it is impossible to satisfy that demand in any reasonable
way with the current number of closed carrels in the Library. As a result, the number of closed
carrels in the Law Library should be increased by at least twenty-five or thirty.
At the present time, the amount of office space for the Library staff is wholly inadequate. Five
additional offices for Public Services staff are needed. One office needs to be built on the third
floor so that each current Reference Librarian has her own office and the current unsatisfactory
sharing arrangement for two of them is ended; one office needs to be added on the second floor
for the recently authorized Circulation Librarian; two offices need to be added on the first floor
for the Student Computer Support Librarians who have been sharing space in the A/V room that
is needed for more microform storage cabinets; and one office needs to be added on the ground
floor for the Foreign, Comparative, and International Law Librarian permitting ready access to
the collection that librarian supports. The move by the FCIL Librarian to a ground floor office
would vacate a third floor office which could then be occupied by the proposed Rare
Books/Special Collections/Preservation Librarian that the Library hopes to add in the next few
years. Members of the staff of the Collection Services Division and their offices and
workstations are on the second floor, and are generally organized in a way that is intended to
facilitate their workflow patterns. However, their work space is unacceptably tight and wholly
inadequate for the effective and efficient performance of their functions. For example, there is
no room for the receiving and processing of large gifts. As a result, there is a pressing need for
much more space for that Division and for improvements in the quality of many of its personal
work areas. Circulation, which is responsible for both interlibrary loans and reserves, needs
261
more staff work space, and more space for shelving reserve materials and for storing and
controlling materials requiring reshelving. There is a Staff Room within the Library on level 3
which is heavily used for staff and committee meetings, coffee breaks, and lunches.
The computer lab/electronic classroom located on level one of the Library needs to be enlarged.
The current room was created out of two former small rooms and has proven to be too small and
also to be shaped in a manner that hinders rather than facilitates effective teaching. In addition to
the twenty-one student workstations, the computer lab contains a teaching workstation connected
to a data projector.
The Audiovisual (A/V) room contains the Law Library‟s extensive microform collections, three
reader-printers, one digital microform reader duplicator, and five portable readers for accessing
microforms, nine VCRs used for the playback of class videotapes and other videotaped
materials, and one DVD viewing station. Space in the A/V room was expanded in 1997 by
taking over the adjacent office. Currently, the A/V room contains sixty-one cabinets for
microfilm, ninety-three for microfiche, and five multi media cabinets. The current cabinets
contain enough space for no more than three or four years of additional microform acquisitions.
Additional microform cabinets will be needed in coming years when the current cabinets are
filled. In addition, more multimedia cabinets are needed. When all of these additional cabinets
are added, the Student Computer Support Librarians who have been housed in that room will
have to be relocated and the microform and multimedia cabinets installed in the space they
currently occupy in the A/V room. Because safe storage of microforms requires specific
temperature and humidity limits and the existing controls in this room are not adequate to ensure
that those limits are always present, additional temperature and humidity control work in this
room is urgently needed to ensure protection of the valuable microform resources it contains.
The Law Library contains a Rare Book Room which consists of a two room suite. The main
room is a well furnished reading room for rare books. It contains a conference table and
bookshelves to display some of the more important rare books owned by the Library. The
adjoining rare book storage/stack room houses the remainder of the Law Library rare book
collections. The Rare Book Room suite is currently filled to capacity. However, several
thousand books currently on open shelves need to be moved into such specially protected and
controlled space and additional space is needed for future growth in the Rare Books and Special
Collections of the Law Library. As a result, the size of the Rare Book Room suite needs to be
more than doubled as soon as possible. Both rooms in the Rare Book Room suite have special
temperature and humidity controls and a special fire extinguishing system. Nevertheless, mold
recently appeared on a number of books in the Rare Book Room. Although professional
cleaning services saved the collection, additional temperature and humidity control work in that
suite is urgently needed to protect the valuable resources stored there.
Currently there are no rooms in the Law Library for small group study or for a small seminar that
needs immediate close access to Library materials during class. Group study should be
encouraged and is a popular form of student academic activity. As a result, at least three rooms
for small study groups need to be created in the Library. When originally built the Library had
262
two rooms for small group study, but in intervening years those rooms were eliminated in order
to deal with more urgent needs for space within the Library.
Additional space to expand the reserve area behind the circulation desk is also urgently needed
because there is not enough room to shelve in that area all of the books put on temporary reserve
by faculty for the classes they are teaching during the current semester. The Law Library also
urgently needs more space for its mail room which receives, unpacks, and sorts all the mail
received by the Law School each day, and all the many large book deliveries to the Law Library
each day. Much more storage space and sorting space is needed in the mailroom so that these
functions can be effectively and efficiently performed.
There are several possible ways to solve the serious space needs of the Law Library. As noted,
the Law Library needs more space to shelve its growing hardcopy book collection, to provide
more carrel study space for students, faculty, and visiting scholars in the Law Library, to provide
more adequate space for Circulation functions, to build at least five more staff offices, to expand
the staff work space in the Collection Services Division, to reconfigure and increase the size of
the Computer Lab, to provide several rooms for small group study, and to significantly enlarge
the Rare Book Room. One way to solve this problem is to reduce very substantially the on-site
storage of the Law Library hardcopy book collection, storing several hundred thousand books in
the soon to be built off-site University book storage facility and using the vacated space after its
remodeling to satisfy the above space needs of the Law Library. This approach, however, has
many undesirable features, among which will be the end of open and immediate access by Law
Library users to a very substantial portion of the materials they wish to use, and a reduction of
the considerable benefits resulting from a capacity of Library users to personally browse the
shelves holding all of the collections.
Another way to solve the space needs of the Law Library, which is the most satisfactory solution
from the Library‟s viewpoint, would be the construction of an entirely new building exclusively
for the Law Library that is next to and attached to the present Law School. That new building
would solve all Law Library space needs for the next twenty-five years and free up in the Boyd
Law Building space sufficient to satisfy non Law Library space needs of the Law School for that
period. Of course, a new separate building for the Law Library that is attached to the present
Boyd Law Building and the remodeling for other Law School uses of the space in the present
Boyd Law Building occupied by the Law Library would cost a great deal of money, part of
which would have to come from non state funded sources. There is, however, a good potential
for getting a significant contribution from private sources to help finance a new building
dedicated only to the Law Library because, with such a nationally recognized outstanding
collection of legal information resources, this Law School Library will remain in the next
generation one of a handful of the very best places in which to do legal research in this country.
A third possible option by which to solve the space needs of the Law Library would be to keep
the Law Library in the space it currently occupies in the Boyd Law Building and construct an
additional building for the Law School next to and attached to the current building, providing
significant additional space in that new building for the Law Library as well as for other Law
School functions. The space for the Law Library in such a dual use new building would need to
263
be separate from the other Law School space and large enough for the Law Library to relocate
there a significant severable part of its current operations. The most obvious candidate for
relocation of a part of the current Law Library operations to space in an adjoining dual use
building would be the creation in the Law Library portion of that new building of a separate
Foreign, Comparative, and International Law Library. The problem with this solution to the
long-term space needs of the Law Library is that it would create significant additional operating
costs for the Law Library because after the creation of such a separate Foreign, Comparative, and
International Law Library facility, both the existing Law Library facility in the Boyd Law
Building and the new separate facility in the adjoining building would have to be adequately
staffed to keep them open and operating during the necessary hours.
The desirability, feasibility, and practicability of each of these three possible solutions to the
space needs of the Law Library will need to be studied and debated during the next five to seven
years and a plan of action adopted to address them for the intermediate and long-term.
The Law Library moved into its present facilities twenty years ago. Much has been done to keep
those facilities up to date and to adapt its facilities to the present needs of the users. But much
more needs to be done. Carpet in some areas of the Law Library has been replaced with ceramic
tiles or new carpet tiles, but carpet in many more areas in the Library is now worn and unsightly
and, therefore, needs replacing. Dirty and stained ceiling tiles have been replaced on the third
floor of the Law Library, but such ceiling tiles need to be replaced throughout the Library.
Furniture for the Library staff was new twenty years ago and now some of it needs to be
replaced. Staff chairs were replaced in the last year. The Health Protection Office evaluated
individual staff workstations and adjustments were made to accommodate the ergonomic needs
of the staff. Student‟s workstations need the same attention, and the chairs for the students in the
Library are approaching the end of their useful life and will need to be replaced. Students also
need more electrical outlets near the Library tables. While the Library tables have been
refinished, and painting has been done in public areas of the library twice since the last
inspection, other areas of the Library badly need painting. Wiring for the LAN has been
upgraded to 100 Mb, and all carrels in the Library have been wired; wireless access has also been
installed in the Library. As noted, compact shelving was also added to the ground floor of the
Library but, nevertheless, the Library shelves will be functionally full by the end of 2007. As a
consequence the Library is facing some serious space, remodeling, equipment, and maintenance
problems in the near future.
G. Computing Facilities and Services
As described earlier in some detail in Part D of this Self Study, the Law Library, cooperatively
with University Libraries, uses a single automated library system and a single online electronic
catalog system. In addition, Part D noted that access to all electronic resources of the Law
Library is available within the Library from each individual carrel, and all tables, and also from
offsite locations. Finally, Part D indicated that law students and faculty have access in the Law
Library and from remote locations to electronic databases subscribed to by the University
Libraries as well as to those subscribed to by the Law Library.
264
The Law Library also maintains a web site as part of its public services mission. It is designed
to assist a broad range of users, from those seeking information about the Library and its
services, to those seeking help in researching the law. The web site is divided into several
sections. Each section contains links to more specific resources; for example, separate law
faculty and law student pages are designed for quick access to relevant services for each of them,
such as carrel policies and reference and research services. Other sections of the Law Library
web site act as portals to online information resources such as relevant databases and web sites,
the online catalog, and reference resources. The web site also acts as a marketing tool for the
Law Library. It describes Law Library collections as one of the very best in the Law School
world, boasts private carrels for all second- and third-year law students as well as LL.M. students
and foreign law scholars, and indicates that the Library provides computer and wireless access to
e-mail and printing services. The Law Library web site is maintained by librarians and staff of
the Law Library.
Forty-seven up-to-date personal computer stations (PCs) are available to Library staff for access
to the automated library system used by the Law Library and also to the Internet. These
workstations were replaced within the last year with current state of the art models. All staff
computer workstations are connected to the College LAN, providing access to all Law School
supported software applications including word processing and spreadsheet programs. Four
networked staff laser printers and ten stand alone laser printers are maintained for staff use. In
addition, a separate copy machine is maintained for staff use.
The Law Library also maintains forty-two up-to-date student computer workstations, twenty-one
in the computer lab (which doubles as an electronic classroom teaching facility) and twenty in
locked closed carrels. In addition, there is one student workstation in the student print lab.
Student computers in the Law Library are regularly replaced on a three or four year cycle. They
were most recently replaced in the summer of 2006. Because these workstations are purchased
and maintained with law student computing fees, these workstations may only be used by law
students. These workstations are connected to the College‟s LAN and provide access to a variety
of programs, including word processing. The student workstations can also access Westlaw,
Lexis, other databases subscribed to by the Law Library and by University Libraries, the
University online catalog, the Internet, and electronic mail. In addition, there are thirteen public
terminals in the Library with which to access the University online catalog, databases subscribed
to by University Libraries, and the Internet. Selected Law Library CD resources may also be
accessed on three Law Library stand-alone public access workstations. As noted earlier, the Law
Library also recently installed a proxy server to make all of its electronic databases available to
law students and faculty from remote locations. The Law Library also owns a workstation
capable of converting information on microforms into digital formats.
In the Library, three high quality large networked laser printers are available to the students.
Their use is charged to students by the use of their Hawk ID. In addition, there are two
networked Lexis printers and two networked Westlaw printers in the Library available free to
students. There is also one high quality large laser printer useable only with a Copicard available
for students. Library staff provides direct hardware and software support for all student
computing in the Law Library. In 2006-07 there are two FTE Law Library professionals and two
265
quarter-time student Teaching Assistants assigned to support student computing in the Law
Library. In addition, another half FTE is assigned to support Law Library staff computing.
Finally, the Law Library contains four photo duplication machines (one on each level of the
Library) that are used by Library patrons with Copicards purchased at the Circulation Desk.
H. Personnel
The Law Library currently has fifteen and a half permanent FTE professional staff positions and
seventeen permanent FTE support staff positions. The current total number of FTE staff
positions in the Law Library, therefore, is thirty-two and a half. Eight members of the current
staff have a J.D. degree. Eighteen members of the current staff have a Masters in Library
Science degree. There are twenty-three females, eleven males, and three members of racial
minority groups on the current staff. Nine FTE professional staff positions and six FTE support
staff positions are in the Public Services Division for a total of fifteen FTE positions in the
Public Services Division. Five FTE professional staff positions and nine and a half FTE support
staff positions are in the Collection Services Division for a total of fourteen and a half FTE staff
positions in the Collection Services Division. One and a half FTE professional staff positions and
one and a half FTE support staff positions are in the Law Library Administration for a total of
three FTE staff positions in the Law Library Administration. The professional and support staff
members are generally experienced, hardworking, proficient, and dedicated.
However, it is clear that with a total staff of thirty-two and one half the Law Library of the
University of Iowa is understaffed in comparison to law libraries with similarly sized collections
and in relation to its responsibilities and aspirations. Although Iowa has the second largest
collection of volumes and volume equivalents and the second largest collection of separately
cataloged individual titles in its collection, it has the fourteenth largest staff among all law school
libraries. According to the June 30, 2005 ABA/AALS statistics, the total staff size of each of the
following public law school libraries with information resource collections that are smaller than
that of the Law Library were: University of Washington Law Library, forty-nine and a half;
University of Michigan Law Library, thirty-eight and one-half; University of California Berkeley
Law Library, thirty-eight; and the University of Texas Law Library, thirty-six. In addition, the
total staff size of each of the following private law school libraries with information resource
collections that are close to but slightly smaller than the Law Library collection were:
Georgetown Law Library, sixty-nine and a half; Yale Law Library, forty-three; Columbia Law
Library, forty-six; and New York University Law Library, thirty-seven. So, staffing at the
University of the Law Library is inadequate by comparison with other public and private law
school libraries with information resource collections that are either close to or smaller than that
of the Law Library and also in relation to the identified needs of this Library for such additional
staff. It is clear that inadequate staffing of the Law Library is interfering with implementation of
the Law Library goal to provide all services in relation to the acquisition, processing, and use of
the Law Library collection and facilities that are deemed necessary to meet the needs of its
constituents.
There is an urgent need for two additional professional staff positions in the Law Library. The
first of these additional positions is a Circulation/Reference Librarian III. The Circulation Desk
266
is open 106 hours each week. It is the primary service point for the Law Library. Library
Administration has become acutely aware during recent years of very substantial staff shortages
in this area. Because of recurring and predictable illnesses and vacations, the Law Library has
had to use much higher paid employees (Head of Public Services and the Executive Law
Librarian) to cover the Circulation Desk when illness or vacation of existing Circulation staff
leaves that Desk unstaffed. This is a serious misuse of much higher paid staff who should be
working on their more responsible duties for the Library rather than being diverted to cover
Circulation Desk duty that should be covered by much less highly paid staff. It has also become
apparent that the Law Library needs a trained P&S staff member to coordinate all of the
activities of the Circulation Department to meet the increasing responsibilities of the
Department. As a result, a new full-time Circulation/Reference Librarian position needs to be
added to the Law Library staff so that necessary services to students, faculty, the bar, and the
public will not suffer because of the currently inadequate staffing for this essential Library
function. Half of this position was added at the start of the 2006-2007 fiscal year and it is
expected that the other half of this position will be added at the start of the 2007-2008 fiscal year.
The new Circulation/Reference Librarian will supervise circulation, reserves, interlibrary loan,
copier and printer maintenance, and stacks maintenance, in the Law Library.
The
Circulation/Reference Librarian would also train and supervise all Circulation staff, hire and
supervise student workers, coordinate the staffing of the Circulation Desk, implement and review
Circulation Departmental policies and procedures, and coordinate Library security and facility
management. The Circulation/Reference Librarian will also participate in Reference Desk
staffing and some teaching of legal research to law students. This individual will report to the
Head of Public Services.
A full-time Rare Books/Special Collections and Preservation Librarian should also be added to
the professional staff of the Law Library. This is a position that is common in peer law school
libraries (such as Columbia, Yale, Texas, Michigan, Minnesota, NYU, Georgetown) and that is
lacking in the Iowa Law Library. The librarian in this position would be responsible for caring
for the rare books collection the Law Library already owns and for actively seeking donors to
expand this collection. This position would also be in charge of surveying the physical condition
of the general collection of the Library and determining which of those books should be moved
to the Rare Books Room and which of those books in the Library collection should be repaired.
The librarian in this position should also have a special knowledge of legal history and would
become the reference specialist on legal history research in this library. This person would also
be a member of the reference team and could be called upon to do some general reference work
and legal research methods teaching where appropriate. In addition, this new position would be
responsible for creating and servicing other special collections that should be preserved in the
Law Library such as important papers or documents relating to the history and operation of this
law school, or preeminent lawyers, scholars, or legal institutions in this state, or associated with
this law school.
The Law Library relies heavily on student help for many clerical and routine tasks. In recent
years it has employed as many as seventy-five to eighty students each year (about fourteen FTE)
to keep the Library operating smoothly. In general, part-time student workers are not as
267
effective, efficient, or reliable as full-time staff, and the training of student workers for relatively
short periods of subsequent employment in the Library is costly in regular staff time; but the
Library cannot manage without these additional workers. Library policy has been to hire only
law students for Circulation Desk duties and, if they are available, only work-study students for
other duties. The Law Library has done this to maximize its use of available work-study funds in
order to stretch the purchasing power of its very limited general expense funds. This heavy
dependence on the use of hourly work-study employees renders the quality of services
inconsistent and requires a considerable expenditure in staff time for hiring, training, and
supervision. Such heavy reliance on a federal/state grant program for basic Library operations is
also neither strategically nor operationally prudent because each year there is no guarantee of the
size of the available work-study funds or the number of work study students available and
qualified for Library employment.
The salaries of the professional staff in the Library are set by the Associate Dean for Research
within the resources made available to the Law Library for this purpose by the University
Central Administration, and are subject to the rules of the Professional and Scientific Staff
System of the Board of Regents. The salaries of the support staff are set by the collective
bargaining agreement between the Board of Regents and the support staff unions. A special
effort was made last year to upgrade the salaries of the most underpaid members of the Law
Library professional staff. As a result, in comparison to the salaries paid by competitor law
libraries, this Law Library‟s professional staff salaries have improved somewhat. However, the
salaries of several of the professional employees of the Law Library are still significantly below
what they should be and are insufficiently competitive. The efforts to improve the salaries of
Law Library professional staff members must, therefore, be continued but, of course, are
dependent upon the sufficiency of state funding as well as the cooperation of the University
Central Administration.
Promotion in rank of the Law Library‟s professional staff from Librarian I to II, from II to III,
and from III to IV, occurs on recommendation of the Associate Dean for Research to the
University Central Administration, and is subject to the rules of the University Professional and
Scientific Staff System which designates the criteria for promotion to each rank. Currently, there
are four Law Library professional staff members classified as Librarian II, nine as Librarian III,
two as Librarian IV, one as a Departmental Information Specialist, and one, the Executive Law
Librarian, as an Associate Director, the equivalent of a super-rank of Librarian V.
Changes resulting from the implementation of new technologies have necessitated changes in the
criteria and level of sophistication needed for various support staff positions throughout the Law
Library. The Library needs to be able to recruit and retain people with skills that are not
currently represented in the support staff Library Assistant or Clerk classifications. The Library
must also be able to promote people in their job as they acquire new needed skills and duties. As
a result, the Law Library needs to work with University‟s Human Resources staff and the
Regents Board Office to develop new and more appropriate classifications that reflect the
technological skills and levels of sophistication needed in today‟s research libraries.
268
I.
Administration and Budget
Since 1985, the Law Library has been headed by the Associate Dean for Research, Arthur Earl
Bonfield, who is the chief executive officer and an Executive Law Librarian, Mary Ann Nelson,
who is the principal day-to-day operating officer. The Associate Dean for Research is a senior
Law School faculty member who is a distinguished scholar and teacher. He had been chair of
the Law School Library Committee for more than a decade before assuming this position twentyone years ago, has a special interest in law libraries, and is an avid bibliophile. The Executive
Librarian is an outstanding professionally trained law librarian and lawyer. She has had a long
and successful career as a librarian and administrator in several law school libraries and serves as
the principal day-to-day chief operating officer of the Library.
The Associate Dean for Research has oversight responsibility for all aspects of the Library,
including all Library policy, budgetary, personnel, and planning decisions. He has special
responsibility for the integration of the Law Library operations and programs into the academic
programs of the Law School and for planning the development of the Library‟s information
resources collection. The Associate Dean is assigned Law Library administrative duties on a
half-time basis but in practice spends much more than half-time on his Library responsibilities.
The remainder of the Associate Dean‟s time is spent on his teaching, research, and professional
service. The Associate Dean for Research reports to the Dean of the Law School. The
Executive Law Librarian is responsible on a day-to-day basis for the operation of all collection
development and public services of the Law Library and all day-to-day budget and personnel
implementation and reports to the Associate Dean for Research. Each year, the Law Library
prepares an Annual Report which is submitted to the Dean of the Law School. See Appendix 6-3.
Oversight responsibility by the faculty for the administration of the Law Library rests with the
Internal Procedures and Administration Committee of the Law School which reviews
periodically the Law Library [Information Resources] Acquisition Policies and Collection
Development Guidelines. (The last such review was on 2/1/06.) See Appendix 6-2. Oversight
responsibility by the faculty for the educational program of the Law Library – the teaching of
legal research methods – rests with the Curriculum Committee of the Law School.
The managerial arrangement of a nominally half-time faculty member head who is not a
professionally trained librarian and a full-time professionally trained librarian who serves as
chief operating officer used in this law library is unusual in the law school library world; but it
has functioned very well at this school. It was instituted by the Dean of the Law School in 1985
only after full consultation with the entire Law School faculty and the professional staff of the
Law Library. This managerial arrangement combines the special expertise of a senior faculty
member who is a distinguished scholar and teacher with the special expertise of an experienced
senior professional librarian with substantial experience as a librarian and administrator in
several other major law school libraries. It has reinforced the centrality of the Law Library to the
academic mission of the Law School, facilitated a fuller integration of the Law Library‟s
programs and services into the academic programs of the Law School, and provided strong
representation for the interests of the Law Library in its dealings with the University Central
Administration from whom all the funding for the operation of the Law Library comes. In
addition, this administrative arrangement has significantly enhanced the understanding of both
269
the faculty and the librarians of their interrelated needs and opportunities. The appointment of a
senior faculty member who is an accomplished scholar and teacher as Chief Executive Officer of
the Law Library has been especially effective in obtaining resources from the University Central
Administration for the Law Library and in enhancing the respect for the Law Library in the
University Central Administration. It has also helped to secure the support of the Dean and
faculty of the Law School for the Library.
The Library staff is divided into two principal Divisions: Public Services and Collection
Services. The Heads of both of those Divisions report to the Executive Librarian. Within the
Public Services Division there is a Reference Department, a Circulation Department, a Student
Computer Support Services Department, and a Special Services Department. The addition of the
new full-time Head Student Computer Services Librarian will permit the position to assume
supervision responsibilities for all student computing in the Law Library including the half-time
Student Computer Support Librarian, two Student Computing TAs, and a Computing
Information Specialist. As the Head of Student Computer Services in the Library this position
will report to the Head of Public Services. Within the Collection Services Division there are the
following Departments: Collection Access (monographic and non-print cataloging, binding/end
processing, federal documents), Continuing Collections (serials cataloging, serials/continuation
receiving), and Collection Development (coordination of selection, new title orders/receipts,
payments). Meetings are held with the entire professional staff every other month to discuss
issues of current concern within the Library and Library policy. Divisions and Departments hold
staff meetings on a regular basis. A copy of the Table of Organization for the Law Library
follows in Table 6-3. The overall Library management team consists of the Associate Dean for
Research, the Executive Law Librarian, the Head of Collection Services, and the Head of Public
Services. They meet as a group as often as necessary to discuss matters of overall Library
concern.
The budget of the Law Library is prepared by the Associate Dean for Research after consultation
with the Executive Law Librarian, the Heads of the Library Divisions, and such other Law
Library staff members as is appropriate, and the Dean of the Law School. With the approval of
the Dean of the Law School and the University Central Administration, the Associate Dean for
Research deals directly with the University Provost with respect to all Law Library budget
matters, since the Law Library is funded directly by the University Central Administration and
competes directly with the University Libraries for University library resources. The Law
Library budget is a wholly separate part of the Law School budget which is under the jurisdiction
of the Dean. Because the Law Library is entirely independent of the University Library, its
budgeting and operations are entirely independent of the University Libraries. Nevertheless, the
two libraries cooperate on many things such as the operation of the University automated library
system (Infohawk) and in a division of subject matter responsibility with respect to acquisitions
of new information resources.
The total 2006-2007 budget of the University of Iowa Law Library, including employee fringe
benefits, is $5,261,984. This figure includes University General Education Fund monies
allocated to the Law Library by the University Central Administration, law student computer
fees, income generated by Law Library public use photo duplication and printing machines, and
270
funds received from private donors. This figure does not include the cost of the Law Library‟s
share of the operation of the University‟s automated library system which is included in a
separate budget for that system that is incorporated in the budget of the University Libraries.
When compared to the total budgets of law school libraries with information resource collections
of a similar size, this Law Library is significantly underfunded. It is also significantly
underfunded in relation to the aspirations and the specific needs of the Law Library and the Law
School. In relation to specific identified needs of this library for collection building and
maintenance, for staff services, and for the professional development of the staff, the budget of
the Law Library is especially inadequate. It should also be noted that the Law Library‟s General
Expense Fund has been virtually frozen for more than ten years. It is from this fund that the
Library pays for its phone lines, all library supplies, student workers, bibliographic utilities,
RLG/OCLC membership and services, and travel and staff development. The Law Library
urgently needs additional funds for these purposes because the stagnant General Expense Fund is
not nearly sufficient to satisfy these essential needs. Finally, some way needs to be found to
finance the recurring equipment needs of the Law Library. Currently, there is no reliable
recurring money in the Law Library budget with which to purchase such items as additional
storage cabinets for microforms, replacement computers for the Library staff, or replacement
furniture. Specific requests must be made each year to the University Central Administration for
funds with which to purchase such equipment. Student computing in the Law Library is funded
by a student computing fee. The proceeds of this fee support the purchase of electronic
databases, software, workstations and other hardware, and support staff, for law student
computing in the Law Library. A financial need worth special emphasis is the need for recurring
funds for the professional development of Law Library staff. In recent years the per person
amount of money available for this purpose for professional development has varied from $350,
to none, to $500, and in the current year is $500. This situation is unsatisfactory in a rapidly
changing environment where it is especially necessary to keep the professional staff of the
Library as up to date as possible. At least $1,250 per year per librarian on a reliable recurring
basis is therefore urgently needed for this purpose.
Information provided in this Self Study indicates that the University of Iowa Law Library is
significantly underfunded in relation to its quality and its attainable aspirations. According to the
ABA/AALS Annual Survey Law School Statistics for June 30, 2005, the University of Iowa Law
Library, with the second largest collection of information resources among all law schools, had
the eleventh largest financial resources to perform all of its functions.
271
TABLE 6-2 ABA/AALS LIBRARY STATISTICS TOTAL MONEY SPENT
JUNE 30, 2005
School
(All Law School Libraries)
Total Money Spent
Harvard
Rank
$12,231,443
1
New York University
$8,628,849
2
Georgetown
$7,764,802
3
Yale
$6,351,802
4
University of CaliforniaBerkeley
$6,271,885
5
Thomas M. Cooley
$5,947,533
6
University of Michigan
$5,839,259
7
George Washington University
$5,332,789
8
Columbia
$5,269,982
9
American University
$4,911,512
10
$4,829,573
11
University of Iowa
272
As the above table indicates the University of Iowa Law Library total budget is much less than
its peer Law Libraries. While the disparity between its total budget size – eleventh – and the
comparative size of its information resources collection in relation to other law school libraries –
second – may be a tribute to the Iowa Law School Library‟s clarity in setting and persistence in
pursuing its top priority, and its efficiency in doing so, the inadequacy of its overall financial
resources are now clearly placing its information resources accomplishments and continuing
service responsibilities in jeopardy. As a result, a serious effort should be made by the
University to reduce this disparity between the funding of the Law Library and its quality and
attainable aspirations. Based on the above figures, which are now almost two years old, only a
few hundred thousand dollars of additional recurring funding would be required. There are a
number of reasons why, even in these difficult financial circumstance, the University should give
a very high priority to financial support for the University of Iowa Law Library.
First, the Law Library is a nationally recognized center of real excellence that brings great
benefits to the reputation of the University as a whole. One of the very important elements of the
national reputation and visibility of the University of Iowa Law School is its preeminent Law
Library. This Law Library currently ranks as the second largest among all law school libraries in
the United States in terms of volumes and volume equivalents (duplicates included), and is the
largest public law school library in the United States in terms of volumes and volume equivalents
(duplicates included). This Law Library also currently ranks as the second largest among all law
school libraries in the United States in terms of the total number of separately cataloged different
titles in its collection and is the largest public law school library in the United States in terms of
the total number of separately cataloged different titles in its collection.
Second, the Law Library is central to the educational mission of the Law School. Many would
refer to the Law Library as the laboratory of the Law School. In addition, the Law Library is
heavily used by students and faculty in all parts of the University because it is the repository for
the entire University of all information about domestic, foreign, and international law and legal
systems, human rights, international trade and international organizations, and the history of all
types of formal and informal legal institutions, foreign, domestic, and international. Each and
every day students and faculty from across the University use the vast storehouse of information
in the Law Library for their classes and for their research.
Third, the status of the Law Library as having one of the two best information resource
collections among law school libraries in the United States is crucial to the efforts of the Law
School to maintain its public ranking among the twenty-two best law schools in the nation and
the seven best public law schools in the nation. The especially high ranking of the Law Library
as compared to other law school libraries significantly compensates for less favorable
comparisons of the Iowa Law School with competitor law schools on other indices thereby
significantly helping to keep the overall public ranking of the Iowa Law School among the top
twenty-two public and private law schools in the nation, and especially among the top seven
public law schools in the nation.
Fourth, it would take a relatively small amount of money (future additions of only a few hundred
thousand dollars) to maintain the nationally recognized outstanding quality of the Iowa Law
273
Library. In contrast, it would take many millions of dollars of additional support to raise the
quality and status of the University Libraries; and the loss of any significant incremental funding
for the Law Library would have disastrous consequences for the quality, national reputation, and
national ranking of the Law Library.
Fifth, all financial support for the Law Library and the Law Library statistics are included with
University Libraries financial support and its statistics as part of the University-wide library
support and University-wide library statistics reported to the ARL annually that are used to
compare the support for and quality of the libraries at the various ARL University institutions.
Sixth, state government officials, businesses, and lawyers throughout the state of Iowa, and other
citizens of the state, call daily on the University of Iowa Law Library for their out of the ordinary
legal research materials needs. That is because there is no equivalent library for materials on the
law and related subjects anywhere in Iowa or for that matter in the entire Midwest of the United
States. As a result, the University of Iowa Law Library serves a unique and well recognized
outreach function to these very important constituencies in the state of Iowa and creates a great
deal of good will in the state of Iowa for the Law School and University among groups of people
who are particularly well positioned to help advance our educational missions.
Seventh, the University Central Administration has repeatedly recognized over the years that the
Law Library has been very efficient, effective, and responsible in using the resources allocated to
it by the Central Administration and that the University gets a very high rate of per dollar return
on its Law Library investments.
Eighth, in today‟s world up to date legal information of all kinds is essential for successful
economic growth and the planning for such growth, and this Law Library plays a central role in
that endeavor in the state of Iowa by providing state-wide all of the out of the ordinary legal
information necessary for the realization of those objectives.
Ninth, unlike other libraries on this campus, on-site use of the Law Library has increased each
year and seems likely to continue increasing each year for the foreseeable future. In part this
seems due to the fact that law increasingly touches and is relevant to so many other disciplines,
and is central to many of the most important issues of our day such as international trade,
immigration, terrorism, environmentalism, public health, and world peace. It should be stressed
that the Law Library is the Law Library of the University at large, not just the Law School.
While it has a primary obligation to the Law School, the Law Library serves the entire
University community and state as a specialized subject matter repository of essential
information about the law that is not ordinarily otherwise available.
J. Conclusion
This report provides a general description of the current status of the Law Library. Important
advances have been made since the 1999 Self Study. Both the information resources collection
and the Library staff have grown significantly during the last six years; the installation of
compact shelving in the Law Library basement has also expanded its on-site storage space for
274
books; and the Library has managed to keep relatively current with new beneficial technologies.
But much more needs to be done. The ability of the Library to acquire information resources in
all formats is being seriously eroded by an inadequate acquisitions budget. The biggest
challenge for the Law Library during the next five to ten years, therefore, is likely to be the
maintenance of a first class information resources acquisitions program in the face of an
explosive increase in the information available, the changing and duplicative nature of the
formats in which information is stored and retrieved, and the substantial inflation in the cost of
books, microtexts, and electronic databases. That challenge can be met successfully only with a
significant increase in acquisition funding and even more skillful management of the acquisitions
program.
Staff responsibilities in the Law Library have also grown in recent years and the demand for new
or additional staff services has escalated without the addition of a sufficient number of new
positions to satisfy all of those responsibilities and demands. (Table 6-3, which describes the
organization of the library‟s staff, appears at the end of this chapter.) Some way will have to be
found to deal with these problems in a way that preserves and enhances the quality of this library
rather than permits or facilitates its decline. It is also clear that the most educationally significant
opportunity for the Law Library during the next five years lies in an effort to more fully satisfy
the growing demand for all kinds of reference services, and for enhancing the various Law
Library programs for teaching legal research skills. This opportunity can only be fully exploited
through the addition of the two additional librarians discussed earlier in this report.
Issues relating to the physical plant of the Library will also become a more critical issue in the
near future. Although the building is only twenty years old, the Law Library has already
outgrown its space by a significant margin. There is insufficient room to accommodate staff,
student small group study, information resources (principally books), and more technology, and
the facilities are also in need of some remodeling to accommodate current needs, and some
repairs and delayed maintenance is necessary. As the Law Library‟s needs for increased space
and the remodeling of its current space become more urgent in the existing building, its facilities
will have an increasingly negative impact on the learning taking place within it.
At the same time it must be stressed that there is much to be proud of in relation to the Law
Library. This library is now one of the very best law school libraries in the United States and it
has awed many domestic and foreign visitors. It is still one of the few law school libraries in this
country in which on-site, serious in-depth research on American, British Commonwealth,
foreign, comparative, and international law can be pursued in earnest and with success, without
having to seek significant outside assistance. That is a characteristic worth preserving because it
encourages and facilitates good research by faculty and students and is a significant attraction for
both of them. It also is a key factor in maintaining and enhancing the quality and reputation of
this law school, and in maintaining and enhancing the centrality of the Law Library to the
mission of the Law School.
275
LA II
276
CHAPTER SEVEN: TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES
The Law School‟s Information Technology staff is comprised of eleven FTE employees, all
reporting directly or via dotted-line (secondary report) to our IT Director (Kirk Corey). The
names and duties of all staff are described in Chapter 5. Of these, some are primarily responsible
for the College servers, for faculty and staff computing, training, workstation images, and laptop
exams; some for video services and Ed Tech systems; some are employed with the Law Library;
and others with the Law-affiliated research centers. Exclusive of affiliated units (e.g., library,
journals, research centers), the central IT budget for College IT and Video includes
approximately $100,000 annually for new equipment and $400,000 for staff salaries. The
University ITS budgets cover many of the services available to the Law School, including
infrastructure (e.g., physical network, telephone, Internet, DHCP, AD) support, central site
licenses (e.g., Microsoft, Symantec AV), system hardware, software and support (e.g.,
Exchange), and other IT support (e.g., Gartner research subscription).
The Law School owns and supports approximately 300 networked computers. In addition, the
Law School owns and supports 42 networked printers. All workstations used by full-time
faculty and staff are replaced on a four year cycle. Current minimum specifications are for a 2.6
MHz CPU with 512 MB RAM. For a full discussion of the Law Library Computing Facilities
and Services, see Chapter 6, Section G.
As to networking, wired connections within the Boyd Law Building are typically 100 Mbs, with
Gigabit Ethernet available for the file and backup servers. The Law School and the admissions
building have 11 wireless access points installed. The Boyd Law Building uplink is a 1 Gigabit
connection to the campus fiber ring and the University has dual Gigabit connections to the
Internet and Internet2. The University‟s Central IT Services group (ITS) has installed and
maintains the network infrastructure and provides such services as DNS infrastructure, DHCP
and static IP assignments, and connection to the internets.
The Law School operates six network servers which provide file and print services; print services
for students; backup services; dialup services; and Web services. Except for the Web server, the
servers run either Windows 2000 or 2003 server editions. The Web server runs on Red
Hat/Linux.
Five of the classrooms have permanently installed Education Technology (Ed Tech) systems
including computer, VHS, DVD and LCD projector. Two portable carts with laptop and
projector are available for use in other rooms. One classroom (275) has wired Ethernet
connections at each seat and all of the classrooms have electrical outlets to provide power for
laptop use. All classrooms as well as the Faculty Library/Lounge are equipped for centralized
audio- and videotaping.
With respect to security, the Law School has two-key physical security for the server room on
the ground floor of the library; authentication and authorization (provided by the University), and
Microsoft ActiveDirectory access control as to network files. The University has a site license
for Symantec AntiVirus which is available to faculty, staff and students for installation on their
277
home computers at no additional charge. The College uses the Symantec Management Console
to monitor all College workstations and (Windows) servers. The Law School has also installed
Spybot Search and Destroy and Spyware Blaster on each of its workstations.
The University provides centralized data services for admissions, financial aid, course
registration, and online education to which the Law School IT provides additional support and
functionality, including the capacity related to external relations, calendaring, room scheduling,
the administration of laptop exams, career services management, etc.
The University has a site license for common Microsoft software, including Windows XP and
Microsoft Office 2003 (Word, Outlook, Access, Excel and PowerPoint). The College has a site
license for Corel WordPerfect Office X3. All of those applications are supported by IT staff at
the College and/or the University. The University also has site licenses for, and supports,
additional software including a wide range of applications useful in the management of
bibliographic and other databases, statistical analysis, the production of audio-video materials,
and the creation and maintenance of Web sites.
User support and training is provided both through the Law School (IT and Library) and through
University ITS. The College is committed to providing equal access to information by designing
or deploying technology and web resources that are accessible to and usable by individuals with
different abilities.
During the recently-completed strategic planning process, the Law School committed itself to
optimizing our portfolio of resources – hardware, software, network, training and support – for
the purpose of maximizing faculty and administrative productivity in teaching, research,
scholarship, and community-building. Expressly a part of this is the identification of current
and projected patterns of user needs, including both those needs that are currently recognized as
involving IT resources and those that might now be the responsibility of individual users (e.g.,
research and bibliographic; contact management; data management related to students, teaching;
file management; project management). The College also committed itself to identifying and
developing solutions to policy questions related to current and future capabilities and needs.
These might involve, e.g., expectations or requirements concerning student access to laptops
(including financial aid implications); wireless connectivity in classrooms, possibilities of
expanded a-v and remote access to classes and lectures; services for people with disabilities.
A full discussion of the Law School‟s current IT and Video Strategic and project plans is found
in Appendix 7-1.
278
CHAPTER EIGHT: FACILITIES
The Law School is housed in the Boyd Law Building (BLB), which is located on the southern
edge of the University of Iowa campus. The BLB is a five-story structure which opened in 1986.
The College also has the use of several nearby buildings: 315 Melrose (the Law, Health Policy
& Disability Center); Cannon-Gay House at 320 Melrose (Admissions); 130 and 124 Grand
Avenue Court (Larned A. Waterman Nonprofit Center).
A. Adequacy of Facilities
The Law School has outgrown BLB, and there are a number of severe near-term space shortages
as well as various long term issues that must be addressed. The faculty is vigorously pursuing the
options.
Through a years-long process culminating in the recently-completed strategic planning process,
the needs are understood to include:
Appropriate space for the newly-initiated LAWR program and for our LAWR
instructors;
An adequately-sized and well-configured student commons space, including space for
student study groups;
Additional library space for, e.g., storage of the collection, student study space, staff
offices etc. (See Chapter 6 on Library);
Additional faculty office space, including space for visitors of all kinds (e.g., seminar
speakers, practitioners and judges in residence, adjuncts, visiting scholars);
Additional storage space for a variety of materials, including excess furniture,
academic materials, supplies, maintenance items, etc.;
Reconfiguring the clinic suite;
Additional and appropriate space for classrooms, programs, student organizations,
centers, etc.;
Appropriate space for academic conferences and other events involving significant
numbers of outside attendees;
Reconfiguring the administrative suite to better accommodate student services;
Adequate office space for the LL.M. program and for visiting scholars.
If left unaddressed, these inadequacies have the potential to affect our overall educational
mission. See Appendix 8-1 which contains a list of space needs formulated in 2004 by the then
New Physical Facilities committee.
279
B. Student Commons
Students and faculty have long expressed the need for a large and well-designed student common
space. Such a space would provide for various sorts of interactions among students, for
individual and group study, and for regular and unforced interactions between students and
faculty. It is widely agreed that such a commons area ought to be close to classrooms and be
well-lit, preferably with natural light. See Appendix 8-2 for a compendium of documents related
to the commons.
C. Classroom and Seminar Space
Class and seminar rooms in the BLB are adequate in number, capacity, and configuration for
many current needs of the Law School community. We have also identified needs for additional
space for seminar classrooms, for midsized skills-training courses, and perhaps for an additional
classroom capable of holding 80 students. Classrooms are located on levels 1 and 2 of the BLB
and accommodate a range of class sizes, from 100 in the largest rooms to twelve in the smallest.
The Levitt Auditorium (Room 295), which seats 300, is rarely used for classes.
The level 2 classrooms and their capacities are as follows:
Room No: Capacity:
225
100
235
100
245
75
265
12
275
36
285
55
Levitt
300
The level 1 mock courtrooms are routinely used as classrooms. Their capacities are:
Room No: Capacity:
115
36
125
36
145A
12
Future programming may reveal a need for additional mid-sized classrooms (in the fifty to
seventy-five student range). The BLB currently has two such rooms.
D. Professional Skills Program Space
The BLB includes a legal clinic suite and mock trial and appellate courtrooms. The Law
School‟s legal clinic suite is located on the east end of BLB level 3. The suite includes offices
for clinical faculty and a clinic secretary, a central area containing multiple carrels for clinical
student interns, and a conference room. The amount of space is barely adequate, and that space
280
is in need of reconfiguration in order to provide adequate space for client files, a reception and
waiting area for clients, and conference/interview rooms that allow confidential meetings with
clients and others.
The mock courtrooms (Rooms 115 and 125) are each outfitted with a judge‟s bench, jury box
and counsel tables. The courtrooms include public address systems and video recording and
playback equipment. Rooms 135 and 145A, adjacent to mock courtroom 125, can be used as a
judge‟s chambers and jury room for mock trial exercises. These rooms are also equipped with
videotape equipment.
The Levitt Auditorium is equipped for appellate oral argument, and has been used in that
capacity for appellate advocacy competitions as well as special sessions of the Iowa Supreme
Court. A small room adjoining Levitt Auditorium can be used as judge‟s chambers.
E. Faculty Space
Over forty faculty offices and six secretarial offices are distributed throughout level 4. Faculty
offices are generally adequate in size for faculty members‟ basic needs and for conferences with
students. A faculty lounge/library is centrally located on level 4. Faculty office space on level 4
is currently in use at full capacity.
There exists an immediate need to provide additional space for several uses. These purposes
include: LAWR faculty, general faculty expansion, adjuncts, emeriti, and visitors of all kinds
(seminar speakers, practitioners and judges in residence, and visiting scholars). Existing storage
space is also inadequate.
F. Co-Curricular and Student Organization Activity Space
Office space for the Law School‟s student-run journals and for the Client Counseling Board and
the Moot Court Board, is located on level 1. Space is not adequate to accommodate the other
student organizations. When the building first opened, many such groups had individual or
shared office space. Now, no such dedicated office space exists. These groups routinely use
classroom spaces and other spaces (such as the student lounge) for meetings and other activities.
G. Administrative Services Space
The College‟s administrative services space is adequate, but not optimal. The College‟s
administrative suite, located on level 2, contains the Mason Ladd conference room, the Dean‟s
office, 8 offices housing administrative personnel, a reception area and a general work area. The
storage space in this area, like many other areas, is not optimal.
Originally, the administrative suite accommodated all of the College‟s administrative functions.
However, because of space constraints, the Admissions Office has been relocated to 320
Melrose. This is a workable arrangement which currently supplies acceptable space for staff and
for storage of records, but is not ideal for the long term.
281
The Boyd Law Building does not have adequate space for on-campus interviewing employers.
Beginning in August 2006, the Law School began making use of the University Pomerantz
Center for interviews.
H. Law Library Facilities
For a full description and description and discussion of the Law Library physical facilities, see Chapter
6, Section F.
I. Research and Study Space
The BLB does not have adequate research and study space for students and faculty. The Law
Library includes 441 carrels (available to students and faculty) and numerous tables providing
for quiet study and research space. In addition, a student lounge is located on the fourth floor
with some seating as well as a number of tables for study.
J. Control and Use of Law School Facilities
All Law School facilities are located on the campus of the University of Iowa. The facilities are
managed by the University‟s central administration and owned by the University. The Law
School has exclusive use of its buildings to carry out its program of legal education.
K. Current Planning and Development
All planning and development projects include an evaluation of accessibility and usability
features as well as universal design elements that will enhance Boyd Law Building and other
college buildings, facilities and spaces. The Law School‟s Physical Facilities and Information
Technology Committee is currently soliciting input from interested constituencies and working
with architects to design plans for a first floor law commons and the remodeling of the fourth
floor student lounge. The Committee is also engaged in the intensive consideration of means by
which we might meet our near-term space needs through the use of existing university-owned
houses in the neighborhood for functions currently housed in the Boyd Law Building and then
make better use of the Boyd Building through selective remodeling and reallocation of space.
Although many of those space needs involve provision of additional space to existing programs,
this work is especially pressing because the needs of the newly-initiated LAWR program involve
the insertion of entirely new undertakings into an already fully occupied building. As of this
date, the Committee reports a seemingly widespread agreement that functions that are used often
by many students probably should be kept within the building – and that such relatively
“immovable” functions might include Student Services (i.e., Dean of Student Affairs, Career
Services, Academic Achievement), Financial Aid, the Registrar, the Writing Center, LAWR, and
the Clinic.
The Committee has then identified other clusters of functions that might, even if only in part, be
more readily relocated in order to address near-term needs. As of this date, the Committee is
282
considering functional clusters involving: (1) faculty (e.g., volunteers, faculty on leave, visitors
or adjuncts, emeriti); (2) administration (e.g., Information Technology, Continuing Legal
Education, Business Operations); (3) co-curricular journals; (4) co-curricular activities (e.g.,
those involving lesser amounts of student contact); and (5) student activities. As to some of the
functions that might become candidates for re-location to nearby university-owned houses, the
Committee has begun to identify synergies that might accompany such a move.
283
CHAPTER NINE: LAW SCHOOL FINANCES AND UNIVERSITY SUPPORT
A. Budget and Finance
The University operating income and expenditures for the past two fiscal years and the budgeted
amounts for the current year can be found at http://www.uiowa.edu/~fusas/finreports.htm. Total
Operating Revenues (in millions) for the UI increased from $1322.7 in FY2004 to $1397.0 in FY2005.
Total Operating Expenditures (in millions) for the UI increased from $1633.8 in FY2004 to $1646.0 in
FY2005. The net assets of UI at the end of the fiscal year which would be (in millions) $1754.4
in 2003, $1794.6 in 2004 and $1902.2 in 2005. (The audited financial statements for 2006 have
not been posted yet.) The principal sources of operating funds are: (1) state appropriations, (3)
grants and contracts, (3) tuition and fees, and (4) sales and services (most of which relate to
health-care income).
The University‟s financial condition was described in President‟s Skorton December 14, 2005, memo to
the Board of Regents and State of Iowa:
The University remains financially sound and stable. Net assets increased by $107.6
million (6%) from June 30, 2004 to June 30, 2005. During this period operating expenses
increased by only 0.7%.
The University of Iowa continues to have significant appeal to prospective students and
has maintained its national reputation as a “best buy.” First year undergraduate enrollment
was successfully managed in the fall of 2005 at a level of approximately 3,800 students. The
University‟s total enrollment has remained stable over the past several years in the range of
29,500 students.
After several years of declining state financial support, appropriations to the University‟s
General Fund stabilized in 2005. In conformity with the Board‟s plan for institutional
transformation and educational excellence, tuition and fee increases established by the Board
in fiscal year 2005 were held to modest levels. During this same period the University‟s
program of sponsored funding again produced significant results with awards exceeding
$300 million for the fourth consecutive year.
Thus it is clear that the UI remains on solid ground financially.
As calculated for ABA reporting purposes, the College of Law operating budget for FY2007 is $25.5
million. Adding in the assets from the Iowa Law School Foundation (ILSF), UI Foundation, and UI
totaling $65.2 million brings the total assets under our supervision to over $90 million. This funding
is derived from a number of sources, but the two main funding streams are provided by the University
General Fund and the ILSF. Tuition and fees generated by the College go directly into the University
General Fund, from which all allocations are made by the Provost to support the College‟s academic
and professional programs. Private funds raised by the College through the ILSF are managed
separately and allocated to the College by the ILSF Board. The University General Fund allocations
to the College from the Provost are not dependent on specific enrollment levels but there is
284
coordination and planning between the College and Provost to communicate and manage enrollment
changes. The College has needed to request and receive a separate tuition supplement which is in
addition to the tuition and fees directed to the University General Fund. These tuition supplement
funds go directly to the College to pay for student-based programs and positions.
Regarding adequacy of financial resources, as with any college or other University entity, additional
financial resources would be put to productive use furthering the mission of the Law School.
Although we have a highly qualified faculty, we acknowledge the competitive nature of the highereducation faculty market such that higher-ranked schools are at times looking to recruit and hire
away our faculty members. To help combat this trend, the UI Provost has initiated a program to
increase faculty salaries to the point where the relative ranking of UI salaries can become more in
line with our peer institutions. Most of the funds to accomplish this increase are derived from
reallocations within the College, with the remaining coming from central sources. The College and
University are currently not counting on significant increases in state appropriations but are targeting
externally sponsored funding, tuition and private funding for the needed financial increases.
Budgets for the Law School are prepared by the Dean, who submits separate budget proposals
annually to the Provost for allocations from the University General Fund and to the ILSF Board for
allocations from the endowment income and annual giving funds received by the ILSF. The Dean is
responsible for planning budget requests, managing expenditures, making necessary spending
decisions, determining reallocations, and reporting periodically to the Provost and to the ILSF
Board.
The most recent Annual Report to the ABA provides a general overview of how the College‟s
budget is allocated. Around 32.2%, approximately $9.7 million, is spent on Faculty Salaries and
Fringes, $4.9 million goes to support the Law Library, Financial Aid uses $5.1 million,
Administrative and Support Staff Salaries absorb $3.6 million, general Law School operating expenses
total $3.5 million, research support (professional development assignments and research assistants)
requires an investment of around $400,000 per year, and miscellaneous items (CLE, student travel for
competitions, law journals, university assessments and indirect costs) account for the remainder of
expenses. Detailed financials can be found in Appendix 9-1.
B. Iowa Law School Foundation
The ILSF is the structure through which the Law School reaches out to its alumni, both for
continuing contact with law graduates and for fundraising. There is no separate alumni organization
for law graduates within the University of Iowa Alumni Association. Similarly, although a close
working relationship exists, the ILSF operates as a separate legal entity, distinct from the University
of Iowa Foundation, which carries on the fundraising activities of all other units on campus.
The ILSF was founded originally as a charitable trust by the 1952 graduating class. The object of
the Foundation was to improve the Law School‟s ability to perform its fundamental educational
functions “by promoting a close, mutual relationship between the College and its alumni and by
soliciting and receiving funds and other gifts...for the benefit of the College.” The ILSF was
incorporated as a non-profit corporation in 1980, and has been managed by a thirty person Board of
285
Directors since that time. The Directors include the Dean, three faculty members, two students
and twenty-four other Directors. They meet twice annually in Iowa City to hear reports about
College activities supported by the Foundation, to review investments, to approve plans for alumni
outreach activities and fundraising efforts, and to authorize expenditures of Foundation funds for the
benefit of the Law School. Since a capital funds drive in the early 1970s, the assets held on behalf of
the Law School have grown from a few hundred thousand dollars to around $65.2 million. A
capital campaign conducted since the last site visit raised $40 million.
The role of the ILSF in promoting and supporting activities for alumni includes the semi-annual
publication of the Iowa Advocate, the College‟s alumni magazine; periodic publication of alumni
directories; the organization of class reunion events; hosting of alumni receptions in Iowa City and
around the country; and regular communications with alumni through letters from the Board President
and the Dean.
Financial support from the ILSF is vital to the Law School‟s academic improvement. Each year funds
are received by the College as the result of the ILSF‟s annual giving campaign and from the
investment of permanent funds held by the Foundation for the benefit of the Law School. In Fiscal
2007, the total assets held by the ILSF, UI Foundation, and UI are worth approximately $65.2
million. Of this total, around $4.4 million is invested in a revolving student loan fund. For Fiscal
2007, the ILSF Board has approved a budget of over $3.9 million for direct support of programs
and activities. Programs receiving the largest shares of private support in the ILSF Budget are
Endowed Chairs and Distinguished Professorships, scholarships, summer stipends for faculty
research, clinical education, student research assistantships, career services, student-run co-curricular
skills-training programs and law journals. The ILSF Student Loan Fund lends over $800,000 per year
to needy students.
286

Self Study Report 2006-2007 - Reaccreditation 2008

Transcription

Similar documents

ABATE OF IOWA`S 32nd ANNUAL Raffle Drawing on Saturday, July

boaters map - Water Safety Council

IOWA STATE FAIR

Conference Information - Iowa Lakes Community College

ferring land auction - American Sales and Ag Supply

The University of Iowa Department of Orthodontics “Advancing

Team EDGE

Happenings

August