StudyLegalEnglish.com interviews Stephen Horowitz (podcast)

StudyLegalEnglish.com recently published a podcast interview with me (“E81-LL.M. Legal Writing Tips with Stephen Horowitz“) conducted by Louise Kulbicki, the British-born, Italy-based founder of StudyLegalEnglish.com. It was my first time ever interviewed for a podcast, and it turned out to be a lot of fun!

Topics covered included:

  • Legal English LLM programmes for non-native speakers
  • Legal English writing challenges and tips
  • Using IRAC – Issue, Rule, Application, and Conclusion
  • Understanding categorization
  • Legal English resources

Impressively, Louise also created study materials to go with the interview. That is, she turned the interview itself into a teaching and self-study tool. She created a transcript, a lesson plan and a vocabulary list. Though you need to become a member to access the latter two.

Here’s the podcast version of E81-LL.M. Legal Writing Tips with Stephen Horowitz:

And here’s the video version of the podcast:

Video: Practical ways for LLM students to use the iWeb Corpus for legal English help

Here’s a 15 minute video I recently created for my LLM students at St. John’s Law that explains what the iWeb Corpus is along with several practical ways it can help LLM students (or any non-native English speaking students) with vocabulary.

When I’ve demonstrated the iWeb Corpus to students in my office in connection with specific language/vocabulary problems, they’ve responded in amazement that such a tool exists. But when I demonstrate it in class in a more general context, then the response is more muted. So I finally decided to (1) create a short video that demonstrates some practical applications and then (2) require all of the students to watch the video as part of their orientation and then (3) demonstrate they have watched and understood the video by taking a short quiz which is really a series of tasks designed to get them to take the iWeb Corpus for a test drive and share their results with me. (See full quiz below.)

By the way, this is my first attempt at really flipping the classroom as a way to teach specific legal English skills that I don’t have time to teach in my classes. I think and hope it will work well. But wish me luck anyway. And let me know if you have any suggested improvements for the video and/or quiz.

Additionally, please feel free to use this video with your students if you think it would be helpful. And feel free to use the text and ideas from my quiz to re-create your own version of the quiz as well if you think it would be helpful. (Because if you give them the link to my quiz, then all the results will go into my Google Sheets file and you won’t be able to see them unless I keep forwarding them on to you, which is not a particularly convenient process for either of us.)

Additionally, here are some prior or related posts I’ve written in connection with the iWeb Corpus.

And, finally, here’s the quiz: Continue reading

Letters from a Nut: A great book for helping LLM students with the MPT?

A year or two ago I saw some books left out in a box on a Brooklyn stoop for anyone to take. And from that box, I picked up the book Letters from a Nut by Ted L. Nancy (with introduction by Jerry Seinfeld) and added it to my LLM reading library.

The book is–and stay with me here–a series of actual letters written by Nancy to various businesses that express absurd problems or concerns with the business’ products or services, and the reply letters from said businesses attempting to grapple in a serious manner with said absurd problems or concerns. (Here’s a link to Jerry Seinfeld explaining it and reading from it on the Jay Leno Show.)

In other words, from my legal English perspective, it’s a linguistic corpus of business letters–hundreds of actual business letters written by real people using real-life business letter language, punctuation and formatting. None of that phony sample business letter template from Mr. Jones to Ms. Smith at ABC Co. on 123 Main St. that you get when you Google “sample business letter.” Continue reading

Non-native English speaking JD students: international students and 1.5 generation students

My mandate and jurisdiction, since I started at St. John’s Law School in the summer of 2014, has been to work with the LLM students, i.e., the non-native English speakers. And over that time my role has evolved from being a “legal English” teacher to becoming an academic support professional whose students’ primary (but not only) support need is language-related.

However, more and more I find myself coming in contact with non-native English speakers in the JD student body. Some are international students who applied directly to the JD program, either after graduating from a university in their home country or perhaps first attending a university in the US. Some are LLM-to-JD transfer students who started out as international students in the LLM program and subsequently transferred to the JD program after completing their LLM degree. And some are 1.5 generation students.

According to the Stanford University Teaching/Writing website, “generation 1.5 refers to students who are U.S. residents or citizens but whose first or home language was not English, although for some of these students, English does in fact function as their primary language.”

As a result, I have been trying to think of ways to provide language-related support for these students. But they’re in a tricky position. As non-native English speakers, they lack an intuitive sense of what sounds right. Grammar and punctuation issues aren’t just a matter of cleaning up sloppy usage for them. So in their writing, they may be penalized for language/grammar issues in their papers, yet school policies limit their ability to get outside help on a graded assignment to ensure that all work turned in is that of the students. Continue reading

Using criminal law role-play to teach oral lawyering skills

Professor Anne Himes teaches courses on Criminal Law and Business Organizations in the American Law: Discourse & Analysis (ALDA) Program* for LL.M. students at St. John’s Law School. She has an English language teaching certificate from The New School, an M.A. and B.A. in German from the University of North Carolina, and a JD from Columbia Law School. She was previously a partner in the corporate department at Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP, a premier international law firm.

*The ALDA Program specializes in teaching LL.M. students substantive law with integrated language support. All four ALDA professors have a combination of extensive language teaching experience and legal practice experience.

In the Fall 2018 semester I taught an overview of US criminal law and the criminal justice process for St. John’s ALDA students that culminated in a new court role-play activity I designed in response to student difficulties with the main course materials on the criminal justice process side of things: New York Times articles that followed the shooting of an unarmed man by an off-duty NY police officer from the time of the incident all the way through the verdict of the jury.   

Those readings grew out of my searching for a way to put a face on our criminal justice process. I have found that random observation trips to court are hit or miss at best and certainly cannot show a full trial, much less the full criminal justice process; the best trial observation experience I have had with my students so far has been hearing the full testimony of an expert witness.

I had my students read and study those news articles, and we had in-depth discussions of them, but those news articles got us only so far.  The students struggled with some of the language, such as taking words literally and not considering them in context, and had understandable difficulty with the cultural/geographic issues –  a road rage incident, with racial overtones, on the Fourth of July, in a rough neighborhood. In short, they seemed to be getting a bit bogged down.

I landed on the idea of having the students  role-play the crucial part of the trial they had been reading about: the direct and cross-examination of the prosecution’s main witness (girlfriend of the victim, who witnessed the killing) and the direct and cross-examination of the defendant, who took the stand in his own defense. The students would take on roles of the lawyers and the key witnesses in a case that they were by then very familiar with. Continue reading

IRAC, mirroring and language control for LLM students in legal writing

“Lacks control of language” — This is one of those feedback comments that sounds incisive and succinct to us writing instructors but which, for non-native English speakers, is actually very subjective. It describes a writer who isn’t communicating her ideas in a clear or accurate manner.

In my writing work with LLM students, we work on the fundamentals of IRAC-style essays in the context of law school exams. And I work with my students on an idea we call “mirroring,” which means that certain key words from the Rule section need to also be present in the Analysis section. And those words then need to be equated with key facts to demonstrate that such facts do or do not meet the standard set by the Rule.

However, connecting rules and facts in one sentence frequently requires students to have the grammar to connect their ideas. Otherwise, the sentences come out as separate, seemingly disconnected statements. That is, they lack control of their writing. Also, when students lack confidence in their control of their writing, they often avoid the language they need to connect rule and facts, and the Analysis can end up just being a recitation of the facts followed by a leap to a conclusion. Continue reading

Recent innovations in academic support for LLMs at St. John’s

With each additional year I work at St. John’s Law School, my role seems to evolve increasingly from “legal English” teaching toward a larger umbrella category of “academic support for non-native English speaking LLM students,” with language support of course being a significant component.

This is because, while much of my direct teaching has been with “pre-LLM” students (i.e., our 4-week summer English for American Law School (EALS) course; our concurrent Spring EALS course; and our full semester ALDA legal English program), my colleagues and I have recognized that the majority of our LLM students still have continuing language and academic support needs and areas for improvement throughout their time in the program. This shift has grown in part out of conversations I’ve had with our legal English counterparts at Georgetown Law, who have been offering extensive legal English support to their LLMs for some years now. And it’s also benefited from interactions with our very collaborative Dean of Academic Achievement, Susan Landrum, whose focus is on JD students but frequently has tuned us in to helpful resources and best practices in the field of academic support in general as well as the existence of a large and collaborative community of law school academic support professionals.

Armed with increased awareness and knowledge, the challenge has been to somehow squeeze in substantive ongoing language support while also adapting other forms of academic support for non-native English speaking LLM students (and also for the increasing number of international JD students) without burdening or interfering with students’ already busy schedules and coursework. To that end, here are some of the solutions I and my Office of Graduate Studies colleagues have developed:

1. Conversation Partners Program: Native English speaking JD student volunteers are matched with LLM students who express interest in having a Conversation Partner. (This includes my ALDA students who are required to have a Conversation Partner.) A key “innovation” that I think has helped encourage participation is setting 15 minutes as the amount of time for Conversation Partners to meet (as opposed to an hour or 30 minutes). Also, building relationships with and soliciting JD student volunteers from student groups such as the International Law Student Association and the Multi-lingual Legal Alliance.

2. Written Language Feedback Project: Currently, two Writing Fellows from the law school’s Writing Center are now providing written language feedback to a sample group of 8 students from the LLM Legal Research & Writing course during the semester with guidance and oversight from me. Continue reading