I have known Colin Rule for more than twenty years. During that time, I knew that he had done a lot of impressive things in ODR and that he’s a real mensch. What I didn’t appreciate until recently was the extraordinary breadth of his work, the depth of his thinking, and how much he has … Continue reading I Knew Colin Rule Was Impressive. But I Didn’t Know the Half of It.
Some law professors are banning AI in their courses. Others are cautiously adding it. At Mitchell Hamline, Gregory Duhl is doing something much more ambitious. He redesigned his Contracts course by embedding AI throughout the course rather than ignoring it or treating it as a side issue. Considering Mitchell Hamline’s history of pedagogical innovation, it … Continue reading All In on AI in Law School? A Thoughtful Experiment Worth Watching
On Friday afternoon, I gave a presentation to the Association of Missouri Mediators (AMM) about AI and RPS Coach. I zipped through my powerpoint to make time for a live demo of RPS Coach. I developed these follow-up materials you might want to check out, including links to: The slides and chat transcript from the … Continue reading Zoom and the Evolution of Professional Gatherings
At the recent AALS ADR Section WIP Conference, I led a focus group to explore how faculty are using – and thinking about using – AI in their courses. The participants shared a range of thoughtful insights, revealing both enthusiasm and caution. Their responses offered a snapshot of what experimentation with AI looks like now, … Continue reading Teaching with AI: Faculty Reflections and a Preview of Professors’ Dilemma
Many colleagues at the AALS ADR Section Works-in-Progress Conference focused on various aspects of artificial intelligence (AI). Their papers included the following: The Bots are Coming: How Can Law Professors Stay One Step Ahead?, Hal Abramson (Touro) Detecting and Challenging AI Drafted Arbitration Awards, Rishi Batra (McGeorge) Data Resolution: How AI Agents Change Conflict, Simon … Continue reading AI at the WIP
By now, you know that students are using AI. Some faculty express concern, and they hope that AI tools will just go away – or that students won’t use them. Not gonna happen. One recent study found that 86% of university students occasionally, frequently, or very frequently use general artificial intelligence tools. About 70% of … Continue reading What Do AI and Sex Have in Common?
I have been interested in the use of AI in legal education, as you may have noticed. Law schools up and down the US News hierarchy have undertaken initiatives to incorporate AI in a wide range of activities involving curriculum, research, policy, innovation, client service, and access to justice. This post highlights Case Western Reserve’s … Continue reading Case Western’s Model of AI Education in Law Schools
Critics warn that AI will undermine the value of education, eroding students’ critical thinking and writing skills. They might be right – if faculty ignore AI. You could respond to these warnings by not adopting an AI policy or simply prohibiting students from using it. If so, critics’ predictions are likely to become self-fulfilling prophecies. … Continue reading AI Critics Might Be Right – If Faculty Do Nothing
I asked the AI tool Perplexity about AI in legal education. It cited an ABA survey finding that “55% of law schools reported having classes dedicated to AI, 32% offered interdisciplinary opportunities to use AI, and 83% provided opportunities such as clinics involving AI.” It added: “Recent developments show law schools are broadening and deepening … Continue reading Emerging Trends in Law School AI Initiatives
We’ve all used the terms “facilitative” and “evaluative” to describe mediation as if everyone knows what they mean. Earlier this year, I surveyed experts about how they understand these terms – and how they think others understand them. Spoiler alert: This study found that people are hopelessly confused about these terms, including experts in our … Continue reading Seriously, You’re Really Still Saying “Facilitative” and “Evaluative” Mediation in 2025?