CLA-specific context: Your student population, the three-pillar approach, and what to watch for as you teach this course.
Course Philosophy
This course serves struggling law students who need explicit instruction and structured support. These students will succeed, but they require a different teaching approach than traditional law school offers.
The Three Pillars
Explicit Instruction
Never assume students know how to synthesize rules or construct CREAC paragraphs. Make invisible processes visible through modeling, think-alouds, and step-by-step breakdowns. Provide templates and checklists, then gradually remove them.
In practice: When teaching CREAC structure, write one together on screen, narrating your thinking. Don't just tell students the concept; show them doing it.
Scaffolded Practice
Start with heavy support in Phase 1 (templates, sentence stems, worked examples) and gradually release responsibility over the course. By Phase 3, students self-monitor using internalized criteria.
In practice: Phase 1 assignments provide detailed sentence stems. Phase 2 assignments provide checklists. Phase 3 assessments provide only the rubric.
Deliberate Feedback
Feedback is the primary instructional tool, not just assessment. It must be specific, actionable, prioritized, and returned within 48-72 hours while work is fresh in students' minds.
In practice: Flag one priority area per draft, not five. Include a growth mindset message. Provide feedback in conversation when possible.
Who Are Your Students?
What We Know
Student Context
CLA students underperformed during their first semesters of law school. The reasons vary widely—some struggled with the transition to legal thinking, others faced personal circumstances, and still others simply hadn't yet found effective study and writing strategies. What unites them is that they need structured support to develop legal analysis and writing skills. Avoid assumptions about why individual students are here; focus on meeting them where they are.
Common Patterns You'll See
No logical connection between rule and facts. Student states conclusion without showing the work.
Student doesn't integrate multiple sources into a coherent rule statement.
Student sees improvement as impossible and individual drafts as markers of overall ability rather than learning steps.
Student has no internalized process and relies entirely on provided scaffolding. Intentional fading of templates is the approach.
Student doesn't take ownership of revision. Requires explicit expectations that revision is the student's responsibility.
Pedagogical Implications
Given this population, your teaching must:
Provide explicit instruction before practice. Don't assume incidental learning; teach skills directly.
Use models extensively. Show students what good work looks like at different quality levels.
Include metacognitive components. Require reflection so students examine their own learning.
Provide timely feedback and assessment. Regular feedback confirms that students internalized skills.
Avoid peer feedback. Students lack calibration to provide reliable feedback; poor feedback reinforces misconceptions.
CLA-Specific Adaptations
You know effective teaching strategies. These adaptations are specific to this population and this course structure:
Scaffolding and Fading
Phase 1 (Weeks 1-3): Sentence stems and detailed templates. Phase 2 (Weeks 4-5): Checklists and partial stems. Phase 3 (Weeks 6-7): Rubric only; students self-monitor using internalized criteria.
Frequent Low-Stakes Practice
This population needs repetition and early success. Include daily rule-synthesis drills, weekly timed writing, and weekly self-assessment against rubrics to build confidence and competence.
Explicit Success Criteria
Present rubrics before assignment release. Use exemplars at multiple quality levels. Have students self-assess before submission. Reference criteria in all feedback.
Feedback as Instruction
Feedback is your primary teaching tool. Flag one priority area per draft. Include growth message. Provide in conversation when possible. Use comment library for efficiency.
Common Instructor Challenges & Solutions
The trap: Trying to cover everything leads to surface-level understanding and rushed practice.
Solutions:
Prioritize depth over breadth. Better to teach CREAC deeply than touch 10 topics shallowly.
Use pre-class materials (readings, videos) to cover conceptual content outside class time.
Reserve in-class time for practice, feedback, and calibration—not primarily for content delivery.
If you fall behind: Cut a concept rather than rushing. Revisit in office hours or later session.
Time management hacks: Set a timer for activities. Have 5-min, 10-min, and 15-min versions of each activity ready. Prioritize individual feedback over whole-group discussion when time-constrained.
The trap: Feedback either feels too soft ("good job!") or too harsh (student shuts down).
Solution structure: Use Specific strength + Clear area for growth + Actionable next step + Growth message
Example: "Your rule statement includes all elements, which is great. The application section needs more concrete fact matching—show me HOW each fact proves your point. Try revising by adding a sentence like 'This demonstrates X because...' in each paragraph. Doing this will strengthen your analysis significantly."
Additional tips:
Flag one priority area per student draft (not five).
Celebrate growth explicitly: "I notice you've strengthened your rule synthesis compared to last week."
Create a comment library in Google Docs or Word for recurring feedback (copy/paste efficiency).
The trap: You spend 3 hours commenting; student glances at feedback and moves on.
Solutions:
Require written reflection: "What's one thing your professor flagged? What will you do differently next time?"
Make revision mandatory: "Here's feedback on your draft. Please revise before we move to the next assignment."
In office hours, verify comprehension: Ask students to locate and explain feedback rather than re-teaching concept.
Provide feedback in conversation: Meet 1-on-1 during office hours where you can ensure they understand the feedback.
Use revision reflection requirement: Require students to specifically cite what they changed in response to feedback.
The trap: Remote = passive students watching slides.
Solutions:
Never lecture for more than 10-12 minutes straight.
Use polls, annotation, and chat constantly.
Break into small breakout rooms for think-pair-share (2-3 students for 5-10 min each).
Use annotated documents where students can see you writing/editing in real-time.
Have synchronous drafting: "Open your document. I'm going to write a CREAC paragraph and narrate. Now you write one and share yours in chat."
Increase office hours availability during remote weeks (students may not attend in-person).
Red flags for intervention:
Missing work or frequent late submissions
Submitting minimal effort drafts (2-3 paragraphs when more expected)
Not incorporating feedback from previous assignment
Writing shows no growth across multiple submissions
Comments in class suggest fundamental misunderstanding (not just new concept)
Attendance pattern shows decline
Office hours visits drop off (may indicate discouragement)
Early intervention steps:
Email after first or second concern: "I'd like to check in. How's the course going? Any barriers to success?"
Require office hours visit: "Let's set up 15 minutes to discuss your last draft."
Create a 1-on-1 study plan if multiple red flags present.
Connect to broader law school support services if needed.
Student Context: Anxiety and Fixed Mindset
Many students in CLA carry significant self-doubt about their writing. They often see themselves as "not writers" and may have experienced previous setbacks. Explicit reassurance on Day One that this course is designed for them, with structured support and multiple revision opportunities, sets the tone for their engagement.
CLA-Specific Context
Students underperformed in their first semesters; reasons vary and are often unknown to you
Writing anxiety is common; interpret silence or withdrawal as potential discouragement rather than disinterest
Students benefit from knowing you believe growth is possible and that you will provide explicit support
Red Flags & Early Intervention
Warning Signs
Academic: No improvement Session 1-3, same errors repeated, minimal effort submissions, scores significantly below average
Emotional (immediate action): Self-deprecating comments ("I'm stupid"), hopelessness, withdrawal, anxiety/panic about work
Intervention Steps
Academic Flag
Email requesting office hours meeting
Create brief study plan with next assignment goals
Engagement Flag
Private message: "I've noticed X. How are things going?"
Offer deadline flexibility
Emotional Flag
Meet 1-on-1 immediately
Refer to counseling/disability/academic support
Flag to law school administration if wellness concern
Integrity Concern
Ask clarifying questions, don't accuse
Consult dean's office if suspicious
Office Hours Setup
CLA Logistics
Minimum 2-3 hours/week, split across 2-3 sessions for student access
15-minute slots (best practice for this population)
At least one evening/early morning slot for work-study students
Remote weeks: Offer both in-person and remote options
Track patterns: If multiple students ask same question, address in class next session
In office hours: Use Socratic questioning to promote metacognition. Model rather than rewrite. Have student articulate what they'll try next. Keep sessions focused and time-bounded.
The CLA Feedback Load
This course's primary instructional tool is written feedback—expect a significant grading load. Set up a comment library, use the rubric-based structure to focus feedback, and prioritize efficiency without sacrificing quality. By course's end, students will have moved meaningfully in their ability to write legal analysis and their confidence as writers.