Just another WordPress site

Category: News

  • Creating a Judicial Science, Technology, and Engineering Curriculum: You Can Help!

    Jim Sullivan
    Jim Sullivan

    The road to becoming a judge is paved with years of training, preparation, and the endless acquisition of knowledge. Curiously, much of the curriculum for judicial education is developed without judicial input. Oftentimes, judges are not afforded the opportunity to help shape the very learning experience they rely on for their development.

    Jim Sullivan plans to change that. And he wants your help.

    Sullivan is an air quality scientist and policy development professional with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency in Saint Paul, Minnesota. He is a graduate of the William Mitchell College of Law, holds a master’s degree from Minnesota State University, and is currently completing his Doctor of Education at Saint Mary’s University in Minnesota.

    His doctoral dissertation explores judicial views on science, technology, and engineering, specific to the topic of reliability, and is designed to create a body of knowledge that will enhance judicial understanding of, and improve judicial decision making in, these complex areas. Check out a summary of Sullivan’s research.

    In order to make this vision a reality, he needs judges to participate in a short, open-ended online survey. In completing this survey, judges will be providing information essential for the creation of an effective judicial education curriculum on science, technology and engineering in the courtroom.

    Help improve the legal world! Do you know a trial court judge or judicial educator interested in linking judges in their states with the opportunity to participate in this groundbreaking study?

  • WEBINAR: Online Learning: The Big Picture

    Online learning is no longer just an occasional component of our job – in many cases, it’s fast becoming the primary focus! Join us for a panel discussion hosted by the Midwestern region with NASJE members who have facilitated the growth of online learning in their states and jobs. We will discuss how online learning changes your educational strategic plan, what’s happening in other states, and what’s on the horizon for court education and NASJE.

    What:
    Online Learning: The Big Picture

    Who:
    This webinar is open to all NASJE members

    When:
    Wednesday, March 27, 2019, 12:00pm to 1:00pm Central Time

    Panelists:

    • Christine Christopherson, Director of Judicial Branch Education, Nebraska Administrative Office of the Courts & Probation
    • Sarah Dahl, Program Manager, National Judicial College
    • Christopher Fields, Manager, Curriculum and Educational Services, Supreme Court of Ohio

    Moderator:

    • Jessica Foreman, NASJE Midwestern Regional Director

  • Fort Worth Court Director Receives National Award

    by Mark Goodner, Deputy Counsel and Director of Judicial Education, TMCEC

    Theresa Ewing
    Theresa Ewing

    Theresa Ewing is the Director of Municipal Court Services for the Fort Worth Municipal Court. Earlier this year, the National Center for State Courts selected Ms. Ewing to receive its 2018 Distinguished Service Award. This award is presented annually to honor those who have made substantial contributions to the field of court administration and to the work of the National Center for State Courts. I was able to sit down with Ms. Ewing recently and ask her questions about the award as well as her work in Fort Worth.

    The National Center for State Courts selected you to be the recipient of the 2018 National Center for State courts Distinguished Service Award presented to honor those who have made substantial contributions to the field of court administration and to the work of the national center. How does it feel to have your name next to those words?
    Humbling… Terrifying… It’s beyond comprehension really because as I look back on the people who have received this award in the past, they’re all of the people that I look to as my mentors and my heroes of court administration over the years and to be recognized among the legends is just humbling.

    You’ve worked in courts for 28 plus years but you came to Texas in 2016. Is there anything that struck you as different about the way that Texas courts work?
    I think one of the biggest distinctions between Texas courts in the municipalities is that this is the first time that I’ve ever worked in the executive branch of government as opposed to the judicial branch of government, and so the relationship factor is so much more important. It really is a mutual relationship on how you run the courts as opposed to the judges [in other states’ systems] dictate how the courts are run and your [the court administrator’s] job is to execute those things. You really do have to have a really symbiotic relationship with your presiding judge in order to make the court function. Before, I’ve always worked in an institution where your chief judge gives the directive and you’re required to execute that. It’s a very different dynamic knowing that there’s not a direct report, but there must be a relationship in order to make the court work most effectively.

    What are you most proud of about your work with the Fort Worth court?
    There are so many things I’m proud of.  My most proud moment is, of course, we instituted warrant forgiveness month which was a success beyond what any of us could’ve ever imagined.  I think one of the other big undertakings is our cross-training and our actual certification of staff in the TMCEC certification levels because that had not been anything that had been previously pursued. We had staff working in silos and bubbles, and didn’t understand the impact of their jobs versus what happened next in the process. So really pushing to get that education piece done and developing leaders in the future courts—that is really what we should all be doing.

    What do you think is the biggest challenge to court administrators you’re so close (either current or coming challenge) that they have to deal with in Texas municipal courts.
    I think it’s not just Texas municipal courts, but nationally, is really engaging the public in relevancy. Why are courts relevant in this day and age when there are so many different alternative methods of dealing with disputes? We talk about ADR. We talk about putting pretrial services in place. We’re trying to put different modalities in place, but trying to get people to remember the courts are the neutral party you can go to. Just because you’ve been accused of a crime doesn’t mean that that’s definitive. People forget that’s why we have we have courts. We have courts because they need to have a place they can come to a neutral arbitrator that can say, “State, you did your thing, now I want to hear the other side of the story.  Did you do your thing right? Let’s put it together and let’s make a final decision.” That’s why courts exist. And we are forgetting that that’s why we exist even at the municipal court level where we see thousands upon thousands of people that have an opportunity to come to a neutral arbitrator. So education and relevancy, for us, has been a big push because if people don’t understand that that’s the role of the court, that’s where you get fear. That’s where you get noncompliance because they’re afraid to come in and talk to us.

    For municipal courts week, we had three different sets of groups come in and do mock trials with us. We had young men and women in high school and junior high walking through metal detectors scared to death about the fact they were coming into a court and they could not believe that we were “nice.” Judge Rodgers and I had an opportunity to talk to all of the groups and say this is what we do with and this is why we exist and have a conversation about judicial versus nonjudicial and the role that the clerks play in the way that justice is administered.

    Judge Rodgers and I will say “Does everybody have to be a lawyer to be in the court?” And, of course, most of the kids are kinda like “yeah” Because there are so many roles (non-attorneys) that get performed that actually support the judicial branch and the judicial functions that nobody realizes. With the stroke of a keystroke, we can put people in jail.  That’s why we’re so important, that’s why it’s so important to distinguish—I am not a customer service rep. I work for a court. I have the opportunity to help in the administration of justice.

    Congratulations to Theresa Ewing on receiving this tremendous honor! Under the leadership of Theresa Ewing and Chief Judge Danny Rodgers, the Fort Worth municipal court is doing great work, and it is wonderful to see this national recognition bestowed upon one of Texas’ own.

  • Independence Corrupted: How America’s Judges Make Their Decisions

    By Charles Benjamin Schudson, Wisconsin Reserve Judge Emeritus

    Spoiler alert – here are the last words of my new book, Independence Corrupted / How America’s Judges Make Their Decisions (University of Wisconsin Press, 2018):

    Independence CorruptedJudges, so strong, so fragile; independence, so vital and threatened. “Life,” Justice Holmes wrote, “is painting a picture, not doing a sum.” I wonder about that. But judicial life? That, I know – reason and compassion … many sums, and paintings, too.

    Independence Corrupted (available at Amazon) goes behind the trial bench and even into appellate chambers to dissect judicial decision-making in actual cases I judged – for ten years, alone, as a trial judge; for twelve years, with colleagues, as an appellate judge. The cases are page-turners, fascinating courtroom conflicts involving abortion protesters, abused children, murderers, sex predators, civil rights, health insurance, the insanity defense, multi-million dollar punitive damages, and more.

    It is a “memoired treatise” intended to be equally valuable for lay readers, college and law students, and judges. It is about law, of course, but also about American constitutional history and evolving concepts of “independence” and “corruption.” And, perhaps most poignantly, it is about the dynamics of judicial decision-making. As Professor Aine Donovan, former director of the Dartmouth College Ethics Institute, wrote, it “shows the difficult and often wrenching decision-making process that every judge must endure.”

    Hopefully, it does so in a candid, respectful, sensitive, and scholarly manner that can be of significant value for America’s judges and judicial educators. Probing and exposing, it is painfully frank, and it explicitly considers judicial ethics codes and the ethical dilemma of offering such analysis.

    In three years of researching and writing, I found Independence Corrupted carrying me back to judicial education experiences – classroom encounters, as both student and teacher. I write about them and organizations including the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, the National Judicial College, the National Center for State Courts, and NASJE. I conclude one of my chapters with these words:

    During my more than thirty years of judicial service and teaching, I watched America’s judiciary change – from a dedicated but self-satisfied, lily-white group of good ol’ boys to a more diverse, enlightened, and sensitive assemblage. While some old problems persist, and while new ones emerge, America’s judges, now more than ever, constitute an enthusiastic student body, willing to question and ready to learn. Working with them has been among the most gratifying experiences of my life – a few bad apples, of course, but from Gala to Granny Smith, from Akane to Zestar, a delicious group.

    And the lengthy footnote (fair warning: one of 399 footnotes) to that paragraph concludes, “Such superb [judicial education] programs make a difference, challenging America’s judges, improving their practices, and truly transforming some of their most important understandings.”

    Writing this book, I had plenty of help – some of it from some of you. The pre-publication readers’ reactions to Independence Corrupted have been heartening; and the book has been nominated for the Chautauqua Prize, the ABA Silver Gavel Award, and the National Book Award.

    In 1829, Chief Justice John Marshall declared, “[T]he greatest scourge an angry Heaven ever inflicted upon an ungrateful and a sinning people, was an ignorant, a corrupt, or a dependent judiciary.” Obviously, he wasn’t promoting my book but his words might do so now. Am I? You betcha – left on the shelves, it does no one any good; but in your hands, and taken to heart by our judges, it may join judicial educators in helping to protect America’s judiciaries against that “greatest scourge.”

    Charles SchudsonCharles Benjamin Schudson, a Wisconsin Reserve Judge Emeritus and long-time NASJE member, served as a state and federal prosecutor, a trial and appellate judge, and as an adjunct professor of law at Marquette University and the University of Wisconsin. For many years, he served on the faculties of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and the National Judicial College. He has taught at countless judicial colleges and conferences throughout America, and in recent years, served as a Fulbright Fellow teaching at law schools abroad. He also co-authored On Trial / America’s Courts and Their Treatment of Sexually Abused Children (Beacon Press, 1989; 2d ed., 1991).

  • Meet NASJE Member Emily Brooks

    Emily BrooksWelcome to our newest NASJE member, a Judicial Resource and Outreach Coordinator at the Wisconsin Office of Judicial Education, Emily Brooks!

    1. What was your path to judicial education?
    My path is a little interesting! I started off in K-12 Education as a 5th-Grade Teacher for two years. I then moved into College Admissions (due to layoffs in the district), where I worked as an Admissions Counselor for almost four years. A perk of working at that college was that you could receive a Master’s degree for no cost. So, I dove into Instructional Design and Technology at that time. Once I graduated, I landed an Instructional Design Consultant position at an Online campus of a two-year system. I worked there close to three years, and due to some restructuring, I began looking for training type positions to utilize both my Instructional Design, Admissions/Marketing, and Education backgrounds. I landed my current position through my more unconventional path. My twin brother actually recommended I go for it!

    2. How long have you worked at your organization?
    I have a little under a month working in my current position with the Wisconsin Supreme Court as their newly created Judicial Resource and Outreach Coordinator, and it has been incredibly creative and exciting so far.

    3. If you could do another job for just one day, what would it be?
    If I could work any job for a day I would choose something that works with monkeys. My favorite type is a golden lion tamarin.

    4. What do you like to do when you’re not at work?
    When I’m not at work, I like to watch copious amounts of Netflix and Hulu shows with my husband, snuggle with my pup, and when I’m feeling inspired, paint.

    5. What’s your favorite movie?
    My absolute favorite movie is Twister. My husband did not believe I could quote the whole thing, but I proved him wrong. 🙂

  • Christopherson Appointed Director of Judicial Branch Education

    Christine Christopherson has been named Director of Nebraska Judicial Branch Education, a position that oversees the coordination and delivery of educational offerings for all Judicial Branch employees and judges throughout the state. Read more about it at the Nebraska Supreme Court website.

  • NASJE Members Lead Session at NACM Conference

    Members of NASJE lent their experience and expertise to a cadre of court leaders from across the nation at the July meeting of the National Association of Court Management in Atlanta.

    Tony Simones & Jeff Schrade
    NASJE Facilitators
    Tony Simones & Jeff Schrade

    “NACM wanted to offer an educational session to equip our NACM state court leaders with the knowledge and skills about how adults learn and how to apply that knowledge whether teaching the NACM CORE or leading the State Association,” observed Will Simmons, President-Elect of NACM. “We reached out to NASJE to design this session with the full confidence that it would be a great partnership.”

    A four-hour session on “Leaders Teaching Leaders” was facilitated by Jeff Schrade, Education Services Division Director at the Arizona Supreme Court and Tony Simones, Director of Civic Education for The Missouri Bar. Twenty-one court managers who lead regional and state court management associations participated in the session, as well as seven experienced mentors from NACM leadership. To encourage and facilitate discussion, three participants and a mentor were placed at seven tables.

    While Schrade and Simones presented information to the entire group on subjects ranging from the courts as learning organizations to adult learning principles and creating learning objectives, an even greater amount of time was given to the participants for analysis and discussion of these ideas in small groups at their tables. “Jeff and I knew it was essential that they go beyond just listening to information and actually engage each other nto build valuable skills,” Tony Simones stated. “We wanted them to return to their courts prepared to implement these concepts.”

    NACM SeminarThe day culminated with participants making presentations about material from the NACM Core that would create a foundation for interactions they will ultimately have with their own colleagues and staff. “Court leaders must teach – whether through formal classroom instruction, mentoring, or communicating with and persuading a wide variety of team members and other justice stakeholders,” commented Jeff Schrade.

    Not only was the session designed to enhance the presentation and communication skills of regional court management association leaders, it was also intended to demonstrate to NACM leadership the viability of holding longer programs to explore topics in greater detail.

    NACM President-Elect Will Simmons characterized the event as a success: “The NASJE facilitators, Tony Simones and Jeff Schrade, were outstanding and the “Leaders Teaching Leaders” session was designed perfectly to meet our needs. The participant feedback was phenomenal. We are very excited about our partnership with NASJE.”

  • Meet NASJE Member Sarah Lee

    The NASJE Membership and Mentorship Committee is excited to welcome one of our newest members, Ms. Sarah Lee!

    Sarah has recently moved from New York City to Reno, Nevada, and is handling the culture shock with grace. She was kind enough to answer our New Member Minute questionnaire…

    1. What was your path to judicial education?
    After ten years in private practice, judicial education was an exciting and refreshing way to combine my legal background with educating some of the brightest minds shaping our judiciary.

    2. How long have you worked at your organization?
    I started at the National Judicial College at the end of May 2018.

    3. If you could do another job for just one day, what would it be?
    I would work on an olive farm in Cinque Terre, Italy.

    4. What do you like to do when you’re not at work?
    I love travelling, spending time with my family and eating delicious food.

    5. What’s your favorite movie?
    50 First Dates

  • Judge Peggy Hora Speaks at World Forum Against Drugs

    NASJE member Judge Peggy Hora (Ret.), president and co-founder of the Justice Speakers Institute — an essential resource on national and international justice issues — was a featured speaker at the 6th World Forum Against Drugs on Monday, May 14, 2018, in Gothenburg, Sweden. She discussed the process of addiction recovery, when it is initiated by the criminal justice system, as well as benefits and outcomes of Drug Treatment Courts.

    The biennial World Forum Against Drugs is presented under the patronage of H.M. Queen Silvia of Sweden. The entire two-day event is three conferences in one: a joint project of the World Federation Against Drugs, European Cities Against Drug, and the Swedish National Movement Against Drugs. It is hosted by the City of Gothenburg.

  • The Significance of Sleeping Jurors

    In March, twenty judicial educators from around the country came together in the latest callinar presented by the Education and Curriculum Committee. Callinars were created by the committee as a way of bringing together members of NASJE to discuss relevant issues, when a formal webinar is not necessary. Thea Whalen of Texas served as the host of the event, assisted by Julie McDonald of Indiana, Janice Calvi of Connecticut, Dawn McCarty of Michigan, Ben Barham of Arkansas and Tony Simones of Missouri.

    The article being discussed was “Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, Please Wake Up” from The Wall Street Journal, which addressed the problem of inattentive juries. After an initial acknowledgment that this was a problem throughout the country, the conversation shifted to why we should care. One of the central points that was developed by a number of participants focused on the fact that the power and credibility of the courts is shaped by the public perception of the courts. If that perception is one of important decisions being made by inattentive jurors, then the courts will be facing a major crisis. Some NASJE members made the argument that the right to trial by jury mentioned so prominently in the Constitution becomes simply an empty promise if jurors are not living up to their responsibilities.

    NASJE members also discussed why jurors are inattentive: a human attention span that becomes shorter and shorter every day, the physiological challenge of staying seated and focused for hours at a time, the unfamiliar terminology used during the trial, the complexity of cases and evidence, ineffective attorneys and the bad attitude and resentment that comes with jury duty.

    The greatest amount of time and energy was devoted to the actions that could be taken to address this problem. The ideas ranged from making sure that the individuals serving on a jury understand the importance of their service and the expectations of the judge to allowing jurors to take notes and ask questions.

    One of the most significant points made during the discussion was that jury trials typically occur under conditions that contradict the most basic standards of effective judicial education. In our educational sessions, material is divided into smaller, more easily digested sections. Participants are provided with frequent shifts in focus and approach and material is presented to engage multiple learning styles. Trials frequently feature droning recitations that stretch over multiple hours, under physical circumstances and conditions that could hardly be considered ideal. It is little wonder that some jurors fall asleep.

    The participants concluded that education for judges conducting trials should go beyond instruction on issuing rulings from the bench and extend to information on how to keep a jury engaged and focused. This more “jury conscious” approach would encompass everything from improving the environment in which juries serve to limiting the time they are in court between breaks.

    The participants agreed that this is a situation in which judicial education has a role to play. Trial judges can be enlightened in judicial education sessions about the strategies and techniques that will produce the most focused and aware juries. These best practices would go far beyond merely coddling jurors. If the Sixth and Seventh Amendments are truly essential components of the Bill of Rights, then we need to take action to ensure that the people at the heart of making these amendments a reality are most effectively able to carry out their essential function. This is the obligation of the judge, but it is also the responsibility of the judicial educator.

    We invite you to join us for the next callinar, “Humans Hate Being Spun,” on May 23 at 2:00 EDT.