Are Legal Writing Professors Like Nurses?
by Lisa McElroy
In a recent blog post on the Wall Street Journal’s website, Jacob Gershman quoted from a poem and article penned by Georgetown legal writing professor Kristin Tiscione. Those who are fortunate enough to know Kris know that she is a thoughtful, professional, highly competent professor who has taught an entire generation of Georgetown students.
In a recent blog post on the Wall Street Journal’s website, Jacob Gershman quoted from a poem and article penned by Georgetown legal writing professor Kristin Tiscione. Those who are fortunate enough to know Kris know that she is a thoughtful, professional, highly competent professor who has taught an entire generation of Georgetown students.
Although
the poem artfully expressed the frustrations of the 94% of legal writing
professors who are not eligible even to apply for tenure, it was the comments
that caught my eye.
The
first two comments on the post compare podium professors to doctors and legal
writing professors to nurses.
I’d
like to start out by saying that the commenters who said things like “Why
should a nurse be paid the same as a doctor?” were incredibly insulting to
nurses. Anyone who has ever had to stay
overnight in a hospital – even for a happy reason like delivering a healthy
baby – knows that nurses represent the front lines of health care. Hospitals are nothing like they’re portrayed
on Grey’s Anatomy. In almost all of them, the nurses take care
of patients’ psychological and physical needs.
The doctors visit patients for a few minutes at most, once or twice a
day.
But
when the Robert Wood Johnson foundation recently suggested in a draft report that
nurses be paid the same wages for the same work – in other words, paid like
doctors – that idea resulted in, shall we say, objections from doctors. Or so the New
York Times – the so-called paper of record – reports.
Why
might that be? I ask especially because,
as an abstract to an article published last year in the New England Journal of Medicine explains, “[Investigators] report that primary
care physicians and nurse practitioners often work side by side but inhabit
different universes, at least perceptually. Daniel Kahneman, the
psychologist and Nobel laureate who helped found the emerging field of
behavioral economics, would find this unsurprising. He contends that all humans
are influenced by powerful unconscious mental filters that shape how they
perceive the world around them. Given the heated debate over the roles of physicians and nurse
practitioners in providing primary care in the United States, those filters are probably working overtime
when these professionals reflect on their practice experiences and the
literature on their respective performance.” (emphasis added)
The abstract goes on to say, “The differing views of physicians
and nurse practitioners about their work can have troubling consequences.”
Substitute in “podium professors” for “physicians” and “legal
writing professors” for “nurse practitioners,” and you’ve got the crux of the
debate that goes on in almost every American law school. And it’s a heated one.
Now, I also think that the comparison of “legal writing
professors” to “nurses” is an uninformed one, in many ways. Even when nurses do the same work as doctors,
they are educated differently. Their
training is much shorter. Their responsibility
level is much lower – nurses of many levels of licensing cannot prescribe
medication, for example, nor do they have to deal with the responsibility
of figuring out the right medicine to prescribe.
But legal writing professors graduated from law school. In fact, according
to a study published recently in the University of Louisville Law Review,
28% of legal writing professors responding to a recent survey had received a
J.D. from a “top twenty” law school. Thirty-six
percent had post-undergraduate degrees from a top twenty law school.
They incurred the same debt as professors who teach podium courses. They sat beside them in the same classes.
The difference?
Well, the same study shows that most legal writing professors have far
more practice experience than the average podium professor.
And yet, at most law schools, legal writing professors
earn far less than podium professors. Sort of like nurses providing the same care as
doctors make a lot less than their physician counterparts. Huh.
But, you might say, legal writing professors don’t
do the same job as podium professors.
And, at many law schools, you might be right.
Most legal writing professors are not required to
publish law review articles to keep their jobs.
Most podium professors are.
But most podium professors are not required to
give detailed feedback on student writing.
To meet one-on-one with students on a regular basis. To counsel and coach students through the
process that is legal analysis.
To work on the front lines of student care.
That’s an awful lot of responsibility vis-a-vis
students. It’s pretty much ensuring that
these students are qualified and competent to represent clients in the practice
of law.
I’m not necessarily arguing that all legal
writing professors should automatically be eligible for tenure. I’m not unrealistic enough to think that
tenured faculties (including the one of which I am proud to be a part) will
change their thinking about the “publish or perish” tradition.
But Kris Tiscione’s poem, the WSJ blog post, and
the comments on the blog should make us think about equal pay for equal –
albeit somewhat different – work.
I’ll tell you what. Next time I need an IV inserted, or a
dressing changed, or a kind word uttered, I sure hope there’s a nurse around,
one who’s paid a living wage.
And for my law students? I hope that they’ll benefit from the incredible
community of legal writing professors, people who struggle to get by but give
their hearts and souls to their work.
My last hope? It's that, not too long from now, Kris
Tiscione will have grounds to write a more optimistic poem. And when that happens, I hope the Wall Street Journal will report on it.