Category Archives: Uncategorized

Ross Berlin: Passion, Core Values and Principles Set the Standard

Ross Berlin, WMU-Cooley (Kavanagh Class, 1981), is the cover feature story in the Summer 2017 issue of Benchmark Alumni Magazine. Berlin was a gifted athlete, playing football, basketball, and baseball in college. After obtaining his juris doctor from WMU-Cooley Law School, he began a remarkable career encompassing wide-ranging experiences, beginning as an associate at a Los Angeles sports and entertainment law firm, advancing to general counsel of a public works/environmental systems enterprise; then to Senior Vice President of Venues, 1994 World Cup USA; followed by work as a consultant for the 1997 Ryder Cup in Valderrama, Spain.

He then became PGA TOUR Vice President for Sales and Marketing for the World Golf Championships and then a William Morris sports agent for LPGA phenom Michelle Wie. Ultimately he returned to the PGA TOUR as Senior Vice President, Player Relations.

CLICK HERE to read Ross Berlin’s cover feature story in its entirety. It published in the Summer 2017 Benchmark alumni magazine, along with other interesting WMU-Cooley Law School graduate stories.

Leave a comment

Filed under Achievements, Alumni Stories and News, The Value of a Legal Education, Uncategorized

WMU-Cooley Law School Innocence Project’s Efforts Free Detroit Man After 42 Years of Wrongful Imprisonment

LeDura (Ledora) Watkins was released today after serving almost 42 years for a robbery and murder he did not commit. Based on the WMU-Cooley Innocence Project’s motion for new trial, the Wayne County Prosecutor’s office agreed to vacate the judgment of conviction and dismiss all charges in the 1975 murder of a Detroit woman.

Watkins was sentenced to life without parole on April 15, 1976. The WMU-Cooley Innocence Project filed a motion for new trial on January 19, 2017. The prosecutor’s office agreed that hair comparison evidence used against Watkins does not meet today’s scientific and legal standards. Watkins was sentenced to life without parole on April 15, 1976. The WMU-Cooley Innocence Project filed a motion for new trial on January 19, 2017. The prosecutor’s office agreed that hair comparison evidence used against Watkins does not meet today’s scientific and legal standards.

LeDura Watkins was released after serving 42 years for a murder he did not commit.

LeDura Watkins was released after serving 42 years for a murder he did not commit.

In 2013, the FBI disavowed testimony by FBI-trained analysts, finding they often overstated their conclusions. The Detroit lab analysts, trained by the FBI, tied Watkins to the crime scene based on a single hair.

Innocence Project team members

WMU-Cooley Innocence Project team following the release of LeDura Watkins who served 42 years for a robbery and murder he did not commit.

“Hair comparison is not based on science; it is simply a lab analyst’s subjective opinion and has no place in our criminal justice system,” said Marla Mitchell-Cichon, director of the WMU-Cooley Innocence Project. “This is why a state-wide review of hair comparison cases is critical.”

Mitchell-Cichon commended Prosecutor Kym Worthy and the Wayne County Prosecutor’s office for working with her office to resolve the case. The prosecutor’s office agreed that the new scientific standards are “newly discovered” evidence.

Mitchell-Cichon also noted that over the years, Watkins never stopped fighting for his freedom. He never gave up on the belief that the truth would come out. His family also got their wish; he will attend the annual family reunion in August.

 According to the National Registry of Exonerations, Watkins will be the longest-serving wrongly convicted person in Michigan.

About WMU-Cooley Law School Innocence Project: WMU-Cooley’s project is part of the Innocence Network, which has been credited with the release of over 350 wrongfully accused prisoners through the use of DNA testing. The WMU-Cooley project has screened over 5500 cases since 2001 and is responsible for the exoneration of Kenneth Wyniemko (2003), Nathaniel Hatchett (2008), and Donya Davis (2014). The Project is staffed by WMU-Cooley Law School students and Western Michigan University undergraduates, who work under the supervision of WMU-Cooley Project attorneys. Staff Attorney Eric Schroeder and Legal Intern Wisam Mikho served as lead counsel in this case. Those interested in donating and supporting the work of the WMU-Cooley Innocence Project can email innocence@cooley.edu

About Western Michigan University Cooley Law School: WMU-Cooley Law School resulted from the 2014 affiliation that combined WMU’s status as a nationally-ranked, public, comprehensive research university with the commitment to practical legal education of an independent, non-profit, national law school. WMU-Cooley is accredited by both the American Bar Association and the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools. Since the law school’s founding in 1972, WMU-Cooley has provided nearly 20,000 graduates with the practical skills necessary for a seamless transition from academia to the real world, and enrolls classes in January, May, and September at its Lansing, Auburn Hills, and Grand Rapids, Michigan campuses, and its Tampa Bay, Florida campus. WMU and WMU-Cooley Law School operate as independent institutions with their own governance structure and separate fiduciary responsibilities.

Leave a comment

Filed under Latest News and Updates, Student Experiences, The Value of a Legal Education, Uncategorized, WMU-Cooley Innocence Project

WMU-Cooley Law School Student Bar Association Awarded $500 Grant from the Oakland County Bar Foundation

The Student Bar Association (SBA) at Western Michigan University Cooley Law School’s Auburn Hills campus recently received $500 in grant funding from the Oakland County Bar Foundation to support the organization’s Barrister’s Ball.

SBA officers in Auburn Hills

Pictured: WMU-Cooley Auburn Hills campus Student Bar Association officers (left-right) Qasem Belbeisi, Ashli Bynum, Arturo Alfaro, and Shilpa Bodalia.

SBA organizes the Barrister’s Ball annually to celebrate the future of the legal profession and recognize the accomplishments of the law school’s students and nationally recognized organizations. The event also provides students, faculty and staff an opportunity to network with other legal professionals in the community while raising funds to support a local charity.

“We are so thankful to the Oakland County Bar Foundation for this opportunity,” said Ashli Bynum, WMU-Cooley SBA president. “This grant helps increase our capacity to support nontraditional law students by making professional networking opportunities, such as the Barrister’s Ball, more accessible to all.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Grand Rapids High School Students Debate at WMU-Cooley Law School on Issues of Search and Seizure

Students from Grand Rapids Public Schools (GRPS) recently participated in a debate on Western Michigan University Cooley Law School’s Grand Rapids campus on issues of search and seizure. The debate was a part of a capstone event for the 3R’s program, a year-long collaboration between the Grand Rapids Bar Association, GRPS and WMU-Cooley Law School. During the event, students were coached by area leaders in the legal community including Kent County District Judge Jennifer Faber.

Attorney and school superintendent speak to high school students

Attorney Steve Drew (left) and GRPS Assistant Superintendent and Executive Director of Public Safety and Security Larry Johnson speak to GRPS high school students about how to handle themselves if they are stopped by police, during a debate on WMU-Cooley Law School’s Grand Rapids campus on issues of search and seizure. The debate was a part of a capstone event for the 3R’s program, a year-long collaboration between the Grand Rapids Bar Association, GRPS and the law school.

The 3R’s program aims to help high school students in social studies classes better understand and respect the rule of law and the Constitution, as well as increase students’ interest in civic and government issues. Students also received career counseling as a part of the collaboration in an effort to improve the pipeline of persons of color into legal careers.

“We’re always eager to help surrounding youth learn about civics and the rule of law,” said Chris Hastings, WMU-Cooley Law School professor. “It’s been special to see the students grow in their understanding of civic and government issues over the course of this year’s 3R’s program. This debate was an exciting way to end the program and let the students apply their knowledge in a hands-on learning experience.”

Judge talks to students

Kent County District Judge Jennifer Faber helps coach high school students from Grand Rapids Public Schools during a debate on issues of search and seizure on WMU-Cooley Law School’s Grand Rapids campus.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

WMU-Cooley Law School Holds Annual MentorJet Networking Program

On Wednesday, June 7, 2017, Western Michigan University Cooley Law School, Auburn Hills campus, held its annual MentorJet  program co-sponsored with the National Association of Women Judges, matching law students with leading lawyers and judges to learn about law practice and job opportunities.

On June 7, Western Michigan University Cooley Law School, Auburn Hills campus, held its annual MentorJet program, a speed networking event matching law students with leading lawyers and judges to learn about law practice and job opportunities.

The speed networking event was hosted by NAWJ District 7 Director, the Hon. Michelle M. Rick (29th Circuit Court), the WMU-Cooley Law School Career and Professional Development Department, the Women Lawyers Association of Michigan (Auburn Hills Student Chapter), the Jewish Law Students Association and the Shirin Ebadi House Council.

“We are so thankful to Judge Rick and all the attorneys and judges who volunteered their time for this important program” said Shari Lesnick, WMU-Cooley Law School Career and Professional Development coordinator. “Their support, combined with our ongoing collaboration with the National Association of Women Judges, helped make this year’s event successful.”

Front row (left-right): Hon. Edward Sosnick (ret.), Hertz Schram, P.C.; Hon. Denise Langford Morris, Oakland County Circuit Court; Hon. Carmen Fahie, Administrative Law Judge, State of Michigan Licensing & Regulatory Affairs; Hon. Cynthia M. Arvant, 46th District Court; Hon. Bari Blake Wood, Magistrate Judge 36th District Court. Middle row (left-right): Rebecca L. Wilson, The Dobrusin Law Firm, P.C.; Samantha Jolene Orvis, Garan Lucow, PC; Shannon C. King, The Miller Law Firm; Lyndsey Kitson, Sullivan, Ward Asher & Patton; Ben C. Lesnick, Olsman, MacKenzie & Wallace; Katherine M. Pacynski, The Dobrusin Law Firm; Choi T. Portis, City of Detroit Department of Water and Sewerage. Back row (left-right): John Cipriani, United States Drug Enforcement Administration; Yolanda Bennett, Michigan Board of Water and Light; Michael N. Hanna, Morgan & Morgan; Bryant M. Frank, Soave Enterprises, LLC; Barry Malone, Lakeshore Legal Aid; Vassal N. Johnson II, Law Offices of Vassal N. John PLLC.; Kwame Rowe, Oakland County Prosecutor’s Office.

Leave a comment

Filed under Knowledge, Skills, Ethics, Latest News and Updates, Student News, Uncategorized

Trifecta: WMU-Cooley Law alumna has a three-pronged plan

Julie Lawler-Hoyle’s passion for the law was awakened when her wife became disabled from a stroke. “We lost 80 percent of our household income literally overnight,” she says. “The lawyers who helped us through the ensuing financial fallout made a real difference to our family and were my inspiration to apply to law school.”

Julie Lawler-Hoyle was honored with the Distinguished Student Award at WMU-Cooley Law School's May graduation. She is pictured with her wife, Sally, and in-laws Jim and Connie Hoyle.

Julie Lawler-Hoyle was honored with the Distinguished Student Award at WMU-Cooley’s May graduation. She is pictured with her wife, Sally, and in-laws Jim and Connie Hoyle.

Lawler-Hoyle was a May graduate of WMU-Cooley Law School, where she was the Lansing campus recipient of the Distinguished Student Award.

“I was honored,” she says. “And the special diploma frame I received will look spectacular on the wall of my future office!”

Lawler-Hoyle last trod the halls of academe in the mid to late ’80s, when she earned her undergrad degree in English, cum laude, from Barnard College, Columbia University, in New York City; and a master’s degree from Duke University in Durham, N.C., where she focused on English and Medieval & Renaissance studies.

Returning to school nearly three decades later was a joy.

“I sound like a total geek if I say I loved the rigor of the academic program, but it’s true,” she says. “My undergraduate and graduate degrees are from more prestigious schools. But, I can honestly say I never worked harder academically than I did at WMU-Cooley Law School.”

The biggest advantage of being a mature student was self-awareness, she says.

“I know what I don’t know and I’m not shy about admitting when I’m clueless. I have zero inhibitions about making a fool of myself and it’s pretty darn difficult to embarrass me. As it turns out, these are all excellent qualities in a law student.”

Lawler-Hoyle particularly appreciated the diversity at Cooley Law, that she says goes way beyond race and ethnicity.

“It encompasses age, economic background, income, disability, family situation, gender, gender expression, and more,” she explains. “Colleagues are candid about our differences and openly inquisitive about other’s experiences.

“At the Lansing campus graduation reception, I told a story about my Sunday morning Constitutional Law class with retired Brigadier General, Dean Michael McDaniel. I’m sure I wasn’t the first openly gay student he has taught, but Con Law lends itself to spirited discussions—and we had a few!

“One day he said ‘LGBTQ – I don’t even know what the Q stands for,’ and before I could say anything, he followed it up with ‘but I know we need to protect their rights.’ That moment, for me, exemplified WMU-Cooley’s commitment to diversity.”

Lawler-Hoyle has a three-pronged plan for her future practice. First, she hopes to transition to a legal role with her current employer, Pet Supplies Plus, where she worked full time in the corporate office in Livonia during law school and is still working full time while studying for the bar exam.

Second, she plans to have a solo practice that focuses on estate planning for pet owners. And third, she wants both these plans to be so successful that she can take on veteran cases pro bono.

“As a volunteer pet therapy team, with my dog, Sam, at the Veteran’s Administration Ann Arbor Healthcare System, I’ve seen first-hand the special legal needs of our service members and I want to do my part to honor their service,” she says.

In addition to Sam, Lawler-Hoyle and her wife, Sally Hoyle, have a service dog, Katie, cats Hazel and Harley, and birds Abby and Giizis sharing their cottage on the canal that leads into Whitmore Lake, north of Ann Arbor.

“It’s a very beautiful and peaceful place, perfect for retreating from the ‘real world’,” she says.

This article about WMU-Cooley graduate Julie Lawler-Hoyle was written by Legal News writer Sheila Pursglove originally published by the Legal News on June 6, 2017. It is reprinted here with permission of The Detroit Legal News. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Alumni Stories and News, The Value of a Legal Education, Uncategorized

WMU-Cooley Law School Graduate Hardam Tripathi to Advocate For Full U.S. Funding for the United Nations at 2017 UNA-USA Leadership Summit

Hardam Tripathi

On Tuesday, June 13, Hardam Tripathi, a WMU-Cooley Law School graduate and membership director of the United Nations Association of the United States of America (UNA-USA), Tampa Bay, will join the UNA-USA delegation to stand united on Capitol Hill and urge Congress to maintain robust U.S. support for United Nations agencies and programs. The convening is part of the 2017 UNA-USA Leadership Summit, which trains and mobilizes Americans who support the work of the U.N.

“The 2017 UNA-USA Leadership Summit provides me the opportunity to follow my passion to serve the public and be on the front lines of driving change in the Capitol by advocating for strong U.S.-U.N. engagement,” Tripathi said. “This experience will exemplify my future ambitions to work in the policy arena, where I will work with major allies to solve global problems, thereby serving as a qualified advocate, representing the needs of our citizens and communities.”

The leadership summit is expected to be the largest convening ever of Americans on Capitol Hill advocating for strong U.S.-U.N. engagement with an estimated attendance of more than 300 individuals. With the future of America’s international engagement in the spotlight, the UNA-USA advocacy event comes at a pivotal moment for the U.S.-U.N. relationship. UNA-USA advocates will collectively call for full U.S. funding for U.N. regular budget and peacekeeping dues in the fiscal year 2018 budget through face-to-face meetings with members of Congress and their staff.

“If successful, I believe this will impact the nation in a positive light with respect to U.S. foreign policy. United States engagement will promote peace, national security and humanitarian efforts here in our homeland,” Tripathi said.

U.S. support and funding for the U.N. are under threat both on Capitol Hill and at the White House. While political leaders may be in disaccord, research shows that registered American voters from both major parties agree that sustained U.S. leadership at the U.N. is vital. A nationwide poll released earlier this year by the Better World Campaign found that a vast majority of Americans (88 percent) believe it is important for the U.S. to continue its active role at the U.N. Further, 67 percent support the U.S. paying its dues to the U.N. on time and in full.

WHO:              Delegation of UNA-USA, Tampa Bay directors and UNA-USA members nationwide

WHAT:            2017 UNA-USA Leadership Summit, the largest convening ever of Americans on Capitol Hill advocating for strong U.S.-UN engagement

WHEN:            Tuesday, June 13, 2017 from 7:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET

WHERE:           United States Capitol Building, Washington, D.C.

Please contact Hardam Tripathi at tripathihard@gmail.com or 863-370-2427 to interview someone from Tampa, Florida who is participating in this historic advocacy event. Photos from the event can be made available.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Ontario Bar Association Interviews WMU-Cooley Professor Joseph Kimble for New Legal-Writing Series

The Ontario Bar Association recently interviewed Joseph Kimble, a distinguished professor emeritus at Western Michigan University Cooley Law School, to kick off the first column of its new legal-writing series, titled “Choice Words.”

As part of the association’s legal magazine, JUST, “Choice Words” is a platform for legal writers to debate and educate one another about legal writing. In the interview, Kimble described good legal writing and why it matters, provided tips on how young lawyers can improve their writing, and addressed challenges that writers face.

When asked why plain language is needed in legal writing, Kimble responded, “Because lawyers think and write and speak for a living. And good communicators deliver their message as clearly and concisely and accurately as possible. That’s what plain language is all about.”

Kimble is the longtime editor of the “Plain Language” column in the Michigan Bar Journal and the senior editor of The Scribes Journal of Legal Writing, published by Scribes (the American Society of Legal Writers). Kimble has published dozens of articles on legal writing and written two acclaimed books—Lifting the Fog of Legalese: Essays on Plain Language and Writing for Dollars, Writing to Please: The Case for Plain Language in Business, Government, and Law.

Kimble joined WMU-Cooley in 1984. He is a past president of Clarity, an international organization promoting plain legal language in law, and a founding director of the Center for Plain Language, which rewards clear communication and shames “complex, confusing or just plain bad writing and the companies that produce them.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Faculty Scholarship, Knowledge, Uncategorized

Conflict: Molding a workable resolution

For as long as I have been teaching, yet never when practicing law, I have pondered and lamented over the “5 to 4 Decisions of The Court.” We want to believe judges remove their personal feelings, emotions, proclivities and biases before donning the robes. We, as rational decision-makers, have the capacity to separate our emotions and arrive at rational choices. Yet, doing so is a constant battle within.  It often leads to a governing majority or a philosophical majority resulting in the 5 to 4 split – WMU-Cooley Center for the Study and Resolution of Conflict Director Graham Ward

WMU-Cooley Center for the Study and Resolution of Conflict

It leaves the law as certain as the life span of a single justice. It causes an uncomfortable uncertainty in predicting laws when the next case arrives for decision. It is a hindrance to those who attempt providing advice regarding long-term policy decisions. It polarizes the Court and generates social, economic and cultural conflict within the citizenry.

Can we propose either a better model or promote an understanding of the inherent value of the unanimous decision?

Judges on our Supreme Court do have the capacity to act as would the conservative, strict-constructionist might encourage, by narrowing the question presented to that upon which most, if not all can agree? Should the Court take those cases where a greater potential exists for that 5-4 vote rather than 9-0 or 8-1?

Two examples of effective use of a mandated unanimous decision – one quite old and the other in use today. 

First, a gift from The Roman Republic. The executive during that 500 year effort was composed of two counsel. Elected from the Senate and by the Senate, for a one year term, seldom extended for a second and hardly ever consecutively. A no vote of a counsel always overruled the yes of the other. The only exception was when they were on campaign and then the decider rotated from one day to the next. (Hannibal famously used his knowledge of that practice to present his army on a day when the impetuous counsel was in charge). It generated a status quo as well as supported change by insuring no minority report when both agreed to something new. With very few exceptions a consistency and collegial commitment was preserved.

Second, a two person arbitration with the mandated unanimous decision. Arbitration is becoming a favored approach to conflict resolution either by voluntary choice of the parties or broadened enforcement of arbitration clauses by the courts. Often these processes are conducted by a three person panel and with each party choosing their arbitrator and the third selected in a number of agreed upon ways. When a party chooses their arbitrator, it is often the case the arbitrator becomes an advocate in the decisional forum as does that of the other party. The neutral/third arbitrator can, and often is, in the uncomfortable position of looking for a resolution within a range of potential agreement, to generate a unanimous decision.  These advocate/arbitrators often will not agree and generate that unanimous decision. A unanimous decision is good in that it is harder for either party to argue they all got it wrong, including the arbitrator they selected. The decision is more likely to be complied with and where orders of the Court are not needed to insure enforcement.

Advocate arbitrators often force the neutral to threaten “baseball arbitration.”  

In such a case the frustrated neutral arbitrator will say, give me your best number (these are often in what we call distributive conflicts where the pie cannot be expanded or efforts to do so have been unsuccessful, unproductive) and I am going to choose one. That choice will make one party happy, though likely less so than they had hoped, and will disappoint the other.  Agreeing to a two person arbitration with the decision required to be unanimous, mandates the arbitrators fashion a result which both sign. By definition it recognizes the need to resolve within the zone of potential agreement which a neutral would suggest, the zone, not the decision itself, and allows those two arbitrators to use their skill, knowledge and experience to generate the result.

Is this something for learned, experienced attorneys to suggest when they have intransigent clients? When one client or both feel they are in that reasonable zone which their opponent is not? To generate a decision which as they know they are more right will be in their favor? Is it a way to avoid the potential loss of a “baseball arbitration” which can often be generated without their actual input? Is it a subtle or not so subtle unwritten, unspoken direction to the arbitrators to be reasonable when clients or even their attorneys might not so be? Could it produce the decision of the parties who, when confronted with the risk of being the looser in that “baseball arbitration,” often sharpen their pencils enough to get close enough to say “yes” and get together?  Is it something which implicitly creates a workable high-low agreement?

This is one more tool in the tool belt, for a specialized need project and to help mold a workable resolution. It can also help encourage parties to recognize the value of creative thinking about processes which are all too often fixed in our minds by the power of inertia or adherence to a status quo.

How do you deal with conflict? How has it worked for you? I would like to hear your solutions at wardl@cooley.edu.

WMU-Cooley Professor Graham WardBlog author Graham Ward is WMU-Cooley’s director of the Center for the Study and Resolution of Conflict. The program teaches participants how to improve the way they deal with conflicts by using new, creative tools and modify existing ones, creating the “ultimate due process,” as well as better ways of “Getting to Yes.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Faculty Scholarship, Knowledge, Skills, Ethics, Uncategorized

Librarians quiet and introverted? Think again! How to make staff in-service days fun and effective.

Spring is the time of year when many libraries are looking at the calendar and realizing that an annual staff in-service date is not too far off. As an organizer of dozens of in-services over the years, I can tell you there are some key components to making them fun, effective, informative, and interesting. Librarians need to wear their organizer hat to develop a program, but also a fun and creative hat! – Duane Strojny, WMU-Cooley Law School Associate Dean of Library & Instructional Support

WMU-Cooley Associate Dean of Library and Instructional Support Duane Strojny

In 2002 when we hosted an ABA inspection for our additional campuses across Michigan, I was asked “How will you develop a community with the library across multiple locations?” My quick answer was, “Of course we’ll have in-services and since we have three breaks a year, we’ll do one every break!” That began the long road of in-services that spanned the bridge of creative possibilities. We liked the Olympic theme so much we used it twice. There was the Survivor one, another based on TV Guide, a series of three in one year covering “Who, Why, and How,” and one dealing with employee wellness. Through it all, I would be remiss to say that I couldn’t have done it without a very creative associate director. We would hash out content and creative approaches to so many ideas (some of those listed above).

We have had guest speakers from a silver medal Olympian to the president of a national insurance company. Someone spoke to us about organizing our offices and someone spoke to us about how law school financial aid works. We gave presentations on our budget that actually included numbers. The IT Department visited a few times to give insight into technology. At our height, we would let people sign up for classes (three choices over three different hours of the day). That one was tough to coordinate, but I think most of the employees liked the variety.

In 2012, we added a campus in Florida, so our challenge was to bridge the gap between there and Michigan. During one of our in-services that year, we acknowledged the first day of a new Florida employee. There was a lot of video conferencing. During one in-service team-building exercise, each small group had an iPad or laptop so at least one member of their team was from Florida. Challenging, yes, but always interesting from an administrative perspective.

Here are some of the planning and implementation tips for that long litany of programming:

Start planning early.

We usually began discussing the next in-service a week or two after the last one finished. Since one occurred every four months, two to three months of planning seemed like a lot to us. We talked weekly so that helped speed up the timeline. Bring in others early, especially if you want them to help present or coordinate events the day of the event.

Think outside the box.

No topic or theme was too outrageous. We made towers out of marshmallows and spaghetti. I was taped to the wall. Teams had to do scavenger hunts. I constantly reminded staff the primary goal was to get to know your colleagues from across the campuses. If you learned something to take to your desk the next day, that was a plus.

Use either a place in the law school away from the library or go off campus. We often meet in our main classroom spaces. We used a movie theater. We volunteered at Toys for Tots (in multiple cities at the same time). We toured a local courthouse. A group went to Dave and Buster’s. If you have funding, there are a lot of options. If not, consider the meeting room at your local public library or the clubhouse of an apartment complex. The typical locations where kids have birthday parties can be very quiet on weekdays and provide the break from the usual workplace.

Plan to have an icebreaker.

A lot of people don’t like these, but they do help set the tone for the day. This isn’t an ordinary work day. We want staff to interact in a different way. I like The New Encyclopedia of Icebreakers and The Encyclopedia of Group Activities. There are a lot of others as well as quite a few websites with ideas to be had for free.
Have some substantive content. Presenting information is important even if the topic doesn’t appeal to everyone. This can help pull together a theme or push an agenda item. We had someone speak about our new Professionalism Program and the library staff became the first group on campus to endorse it as a department. Our discussion about how a prospective student is recruited and enrolled gave everyone a great perspective of what happens in Admissions. The take away doesn’t need to be something to use at your desk, but rather helps give a greater perspective of how the school operates and the mission we serve.

Use experts at the law school or university.

Our law school president spoke. Our vice president of finance spoke. A faculty member led staff through a mock class. The career services director spoke. The chairman of our board spoke. The founder of our law school spoke. We had great speakers with little cost other than a meal. This creates a great sense of camaraderie between library staff and other departments at the school.

Seek feedback.

We always had evaluations. Of course, we never please everyone. The criticism of food drove me crazy, so we eventually took that off the evaluations. Hey, it was a free meal and we always had options that could accommodate every possible need. We also provided snacks galore during the course of the day. Plenty of fruit and yogurt, as well as the usual cookies and brownies appeals to everyone. Some people regularly said it was a waste of their time. They were busy. Remember, though, what your goal is: building community is number one. You want to be successful so evaluations help you learn from missteps.

With some thought and planning, an in-service can be a very useful event. Involving others in the planning can also give the person you least expect to lead an opportunity to shine. We have assigned tasks to groups, assigned tasks to individuals, and asked for volunteers. All approaches have worked well with the caveat that you cannot please everyone. When our staff was nearly 100 people, it was quite an undertaking. We invited permanent part-time staff, part-time reference librarians, and often, student employees. Now that we are a smaller group and our associate director has left, I have been forced to rethink the in-service concept. In the past we had special department in-services, librarian in-services, support staff in-services, and optional in-services. Today, with less staff, it is still important to have a goal when planning for an in-service. For me, that has not changed; build community by getting to know your colleagues and hopefully take something back to your desk for tomorrow.

Leave a comment

Filed under Faculty Scholarship, Latest News and Updates, Uncategorized