NITA Program Directors Leading Many Law Schools

NITA has always worked hand-in-hand with law schools to develop programs and a curriculum that emphasize the importance of trial advocacy training for their students, and this is still evident with the presence of NITA’s program directors and faculty in law school leadership positions. NITA and these distinguished deans are constantly working together to craft the best possible environment to better prepare students for the courtroom by using the skills of trial advocacy.

This all comes at an opportune time after the Carnegie Report (see previous post on Carnegie) has left a lasting impression on most law school leaders. Hopefully with NITA’s presence at these schools and others, the vision expressed in the Carnegie Report will be reached with more ease.

For more information on these NITA faculty and program directors listed here, visit their law school Web sites:

Barbara Bergman – Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, University of New Mexico School of Law
Douglas Blaze – Dean of the University of Tennessee College of Law
JoAnne Epps – Dean of the Law School, Temple University James E. Beasley School of Law
John Douglass – Dean of the Law School, University of Richmond TC Williams School of Law
Leo Romero – Interim Dean, University of New Mexico School of Law

The NITA Method in Action

by Steve Gibson

As NITA's Chief Operating Officer, it's my continuing privilege to visit NITA programs across the country and see the NITA method in action. After conversations with dozens of our faculty, I couldn't help but observe an interesting, and consistent, paradox: While the NITA method, with its focus on the student rather than the teacher, is explicitly not about the faculty member, the faculty also benefit greatly from the interaction.

What it comes down to, from my view, is the answers to two related questions. When asked what they like best about teaching, most faculty (and all of our best faculty) suggest that it has to do with the satisfaction of seeing the attorneys they work with improve and expand their skills - sometimes over the course of years, as NITA relationships so often carry-over beyond the time of the program itself. At the same time, when asked why they teach, most faculty (and, again, virtually all of our best), recognize that it is because through teaching they become better lawyers themselves, learning from the critiques they provide, the insights of other faculty and, not surprisingly, from the students, who often are skilled attorneys in their own right.

Not to put too philosophical an edge on things, but perhaps it is this duality of student focused process leading to improvement for both the faculty and the student that engenders the loyalty to NITA and connection to their chosen profession I see in so many of our dedicated volunteer faculty. The contrast to a typical lecture-and-listen program, where the attendees may learn but the lecturer receives little more than ego gratification (and, often, a paycheck), could not be clearer.

Seen in this light, the connections between the values at NITA's core—things like improving justice, a sense of community and personal connection, and giving back—and the very nature of what NITA is becomes clear. Given the sacrifices in family and professional time that our faculty make to teach, NITA really must be something more than just another CLE program. And I'm pleased to say that, from what I've seen, it certainly is.