![]()
|
Tobacco, Health and the Law Professor Vernellia R. Randall The University of Dayton Law School |
|
How one teaches is
necessarily influenced by what one perceives as the goals of legal education.
Certainly, the primary goal is to prepare you to be effective lawyers,
judges and policy makers. At a minimum, that includes helping you to develop
the ability to:
Thus, my objective is to help you continue the process of meeting those goals. The primary focus of my teaching method is to provide you an educationally sound introduction to the issues related to women and the law. Furthermore, given the impact race, gender and poverty have on the law (and vice versa) my approach to teaching is to explicitly explore race, gender and poverty in the context of Women and the Law. Teaching Objective #1: Educationally Sound Pedagogy An educationally sound legal pedagogy is a philosophy of legal education which is grounded in known educational theory. To be so grounded, an educationally sound legal pedagogy:
Teaching Objective #2: Substantive Teaching Objectives Tobacco, Health and the State Settlements teaching objectives are those objectives that relate directly to the substantive area of the law. They can be divided into two categories: knowledge and skills/abilities. The objectives of this course are:
Class, disability, gender, race and sexual preference issues are such an integral part of our society (and the legal profession) that we often overlook how the law affects individuals with different backgrounds differently. In a diverse society, such as ours, awareness of how different class, disability, gender race and sexual preference are effected differently by the law is essential. This is true whether the person is a defendant, plaintiff, lawyer, juror, judge or law student.(1) Diversity awareness should be a normative part of the value system of the practicing attorney.(2) An education which is aware of diversity:
1. 1See, Crenshaw, Foreword: Toward a Race-Conscious Pedagogy in Legal Education, 11 Nat'l Black L. J. 1 (1989). 2. 2"The Common assertion that moral values
cannot be taught in law schools - or elsewhere to a person as mature as
law students - misses the point that moral dilemmas cannot be answered
well, or even recognized for what they are without the application of knowledge
and analysis that makes the difference between blind choice [or obedience]
and informed choice." Keeton, supra., 40 Md. L. Rev. at 211.
|
|
Professor Randall. All other questions about the course (both procedural or substantive) should be sent to the TWEN Discussion Group. |
. You are visitor number since August 31, 1999. |
![]()

![]()
![]()