Bakery Industry Analysis Essays. Online assignment writing service.
eBooks in Law Schools - Crossing the Chasm?
1. T. LaBadie
eBooks Approach the Chasm: What role, if any, should the law play
in cracking the casebook?
Timothy D. LaBadie
J.D., M.B.A.
April 2012
1
2. T. LaBadie
Abstract:
The electronic interactive book (“eBook”) is an emerging technology that can potentially
change the face of legal education. Proponents and developers of the technology argue that
eBooks can offer a wide range of benefits. They can help students learn material better, and
collaborate with other students and instructors better, inter alia. This paper will argue the
following: although some level of legal encouragement of eBooks is a reasonable option for
policymakers, particular with the ABA using its accreditation powers as a vehicle for
encouragement, the better course is to leave individual law schools to adopt the technology (or
not), as they see fit. In other words, leave it to the “market” as to the question of whether to
adopt eBooks.
The major pitfalls to any law or program that would formally encourage eBook adoption
are threefold: (1) policymakers face inherent difficulties in effectively encouraging nascent and
emerging technologies like eBooks; (2) policymakers face a limited range of effective options in
choosing a vehicle or mechanism to encourage or incentivize law schools to adopt eBooks; and
(3) even assuming these threshold difficulties can be overcome at the policy level, law schools
will vary in the extent to which they can overcome real-world barriers to adoption and to
effectively implement the technology on the ground.
The report goes on to argue that, if policymakers, however, feel compelled to formally
encourage the technology, they should do so through an award or prize system that would give
modest remuneration (and perhaps more importantly, public attention) to top developers and
adopters of eBooks, under the auspices of the ABA. This “if you build it, they will come”
strategy is the best available way of mitigating the three major pitfalls above, if policymakers do
actually insist on formally encouraging adoption of eBooks.
2
3. T. LaBadie
The Law-School Milieu: Hard Times
It is no secret that the legal industry and profession is undergoing a great deal of change.
The Great Recession appears to have been a tipping point; changing client demand,
globalization, and technological innovation are now disrupting the legal industry.1 In turn, it
appears that the fundamental changes occurring in the legal industry have trickled down, or are
creeping into, the legal “supply chain”—especially, law schools. As many young lawyers are
struggling to find adequate legal work after spending mortgage-like sums on their J.D. degrees,
many have begun to criticize the traditional law-school model and the delivery of legal
education. Indeed, many law graduates already have or will have “underwater degrees”, where
the debt and expenditures will not translate into a profitable enough investment, as the ABA
Journal recognized at the beginning of 2012 in its headline story about the “Law School
Bubble”.2
Even worse, some law schools seem to have been aware that their school’s educational
offerings would not make economic sense for many (perhaps most) of their students, and tried to
hide the fact with questionable post-graduation employment statistics. In fact, over 10% out of
the 200 ABA-approved law schools are facing class-action law suits for tortuously misleading
1“Law firms: A less gilded future” The Economist. May 5, 2011. Accessed at: (http://www.economist.com/
node/18651114) on 2/27/12.
2“The Law School Bubble: How Long Will It Last if Law Grads Can’t Pay Bills?” William D. Henderson
and Rachel M. Zahorsky. January 1, 2012. ABA Journal. Accessed at: (http://www.abajournal.com/
magazine/article/the_law_school_bubble_how_long_will_it_last_if_law_grads_cant_pay_bills/) on
2/12/12.
3
4. T. LaBadie
students about employment figures upon graduation.3 Moreover, law schools in general are
perhaps at an all-time low in terms of student satisfaction and approval; even those outside of
legal academia. The New York Times for instance has run a series of very critical articles about
the efficacy and cost of a legal education over the past year or so.4 Whatever the ultimate merits
of these lawsuits and critiques, it does appear that much can be improved about legal education
in the U.S. Yet reform is in general extraordinarily time-consuming and difficult. Therefore,
many within the legal community are actively considering technology as a way to ameliorate
legal education and the current situation.
Because of the current regulatory regime, technology is not enough
This raises an important initial question: Is technology enough to solve these problems?
Surely not. One of the biggest problems is that law school education is highly expensive. Why?
Most of a law school’s costs are faculty wages.5 Assuming the current law-school model is
ineffective, any substantial changes will have to go beyond bringing, e.g., iPads into the
classroom. Technology, at this point, cannot bring costs down this much.6 So although
technology will not be a sufficient condition for improving legal education, it probably will be a
3 Law School Transparency. A web site launched in the past several years that rank most law schools in
the U.S. based on the transparency of employment data, inter alia. Accessed at: (http://
www.lawschooltransparency.com/2012/02/breaking-12-more-law-schools-facing-class-actions/;http://
www.lawschooltransparency.com/2011/10/15-more-aba-approved-law-schools-to-be-sued/).
4See “Is Law School a Losing Game?” David Segal. January 8, 2011. Accessed at: (http://
www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/business/09law.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all); and Law School Economics:
Ka-Ching!” David Segal. July 16, 2011. Accessed at: (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/17/business/law-
school-economics-job-market-weakens-tuition-rises.html?pagewanted=all).
5“ForLaw Schools, a Price to Play the A.B.A.’s Way” David Segal. December 11, 2011. New York
Times. Accessed at: (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/business/for-law-schools-a-price-to-play-the-
abas-way.html?pagewanted=all).
!6
Of course, if legal wages were to rise substantially to previous levels, its costs would not need to come down as
much, but this seems very unlikely.
4
5. T. LaBadie
necessary one. At the very least, it is a primary ancillary force that can increase the quality of
legal education. At any rate, “technology is not enough” is the premise from which this paper
will proceed. Given that a legal education is so expensive (vis-à-vis the return), surely that
education ought to be of high quality. A Mercedes, an iPad, or a Rolex may not be cheap, but
one expects that the premium price confers first-rate quality.
Incremental quality improvements to legal education versus radical changes to cut costs
And at this point in time, law schools that apply technology incrementally can improve
the quality of legal education. For instance, law schools can incorporate podcasts, adaptive-
learning modules such as CALI and Barbri to supplement their existing legal-education offering.
In contrast, law schools are bridled from applying technology more radically in order to cut the
fat off the law-school business model—i.e., cutting the costs. If, however, accreditation
standards were liberalized, then technology could play a much more potent, innovative role in
bringing down the high price of legal education.7
A good example of regulations bridling technology (and, in turn, quality and cost) is
online or distance learning. Distance-learning technology would allow law schools to conduct,
where appropriate, legal education online. This would free law schools from expensive
buildings, investments in fixed assets, and depreciation, which constitute the great bulk of law-
school costs.8 Students might attend the traditional first-year classes, but then engage in distance
!7 Although the quality-versus-cost choice is often seen as a trade-off (you can decrease costs, only if you decrease
quality, and vice versa), it is not uncommon, especially for recently deregulated industries, to achieve “trade-
ons” (simultaneously delivering higher quality while making the service or good cheaper). Both the legal industry
and the legal education markets would probably fall into this category. See Co-Opetition. Adam Brandenburger, et
al. Chapter 5. Doubleday. 1997.
8 Ibid.
5
6. T. LaBadie
learning during their second and third years (including night classes and summer terms allowing
students to gain practical experience). This, in turn, might lower demand for professors or might
allow the hiring of cheaper adjunct instructors. Although this sounds like a worthwhile
experiment, the ABA restricts distance learning to a mere 12 credit hours (total) for each student
and J.D. degree awarded.9 The case of distance learning is exemplary of how technology, for
better or worse, is currently constrained from deeply cutting costs. Despite these restrictions on
a radical change, the current regulatory milieu would allow technology to make incremental
changes to the quality, and even convenience, of legal education.
Enter “eBooks”
With this background in mind, one of the more interesting and relevant pieces of
technology are eBooks. eBooks are still in a largely incipient, nascent stage vis-à-vis legal
education, but they offer a variety of potential benefits to students, faculty, and administrators.
Because eBooks is the topic of this paper, it should be made clear that eBooks can refer to the
whole range of options. For instance, eBooks are often understood as merely “digitized books”,
or “books” that are merely reproduced into pdf format. Thus pdf, or facsimile, books offer no
additional interactivity, and are, at best, a small incremental improvement on regular books.
Digitized books might result in cheaper prices for textbooks and some gains in convenience, but
that is about it. Indeed, digitized books are available already by Westlaw, Lexis, and other
publishers that serve the law-school market.
Defining terms—eBooks
9See ABA Standard 306(d) [Distance Education] of the 2011-2012 Standards and Rules of Procedure for
Approval of Law Schools.
6
7. T. LaBadie
In contradistinction to merely digitized facsimiles of traditional books, eBooks can offer
interactive learning experiences, such as embedding videos within the “book”, or real-time
sharing of notes and comments by a whole class of students and professor. So although digitized
books are relevant and are increasingly being offered at most law schools, the real subject of the
paper concerns the interactive, novel, and disruptive nature of interactive books, or “eBooks ” for
short. When this term is used for the remainder of this paper, “eBooks” will refer to books that
offer interactive learning experiences beyond a merely digitized copy of the existing textbook
already on the market.
eBooks face the Chasm
eBooks are still in a very early stage of development in law schools. Applying the
product-lifecycle model, one would probably place eBooks at the early adopter stage (see
schema on the cover page).10 This stage refers to the point at which a fairly small number of
institutions or people are using the technology, but has not yet entered the mainstream (which
numerically translates to 80% of a market. For example, in consumer electronics the mainstream
currently includes smart phones and laptops. The product lifecycle model as embodied and
adapted to technology in the Crossing the Chasm framework is useful because it reminds us that
(a) not all technologies will be adopted by the mainstream. Many will fall in the chasm and
emerge much later or not at all; and (b) some technologies very much need a “push” to help them
cross that chasm.
The Early Adopters – Distinguished Company
10
See generally Crossing the Chasm: Selling High-Tech Products to Mainstream Customer. Geoffrey A.
Moore. Harper Business Essentials. 2002, from which the model on the cover is based upon.
7
8. T. LaBadie
Moreover, it is important for policymakers to keep in mind that, as with many emerging
technologies, no one can be sure exactly how eBooks will ultimately develop and how they will
“look” even if they do actually cross into the mainstream.
Indeed, there are a lot of innovative companies in the eBook market that are
experimenting aggressively with eBooks, some of which are by any measure world-class
companies. Apple, for instance, has recently entered the market, and hopes to use its notorious
powers of disruption to transform the market for general textbooks, offering educators their own
“textbook creation kit.”11 Another renowned innovator, Amazon, also appears to be positioning
itself as a competitor in textbook publishing market.12 Another example more central to legal
education is CALI, or Computer Assisted Legal Instruction, which already serves many law
schools. It has formed E-Langdell, which started offering open, free eBooks last fall.13
High-end institutions are also actively experimenting with the technology. Harvard calls
its program “Hack the Casebook” and is looking at a variety of novel approaches, including
developing eBooks and software that would allow law students to learn and collaborate with
11“An Apple for teacher? Textbooks are next target for tech giant.” Rob Waugh. Jan. 17, 2012. Daily
Mail. Accessed at: (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2087769/Apple-target-textbooks-area-
Steve-Jobs-described-ripe-digital-destruction.html), on 3/7/12.
12See “College Bookstores Learn Not to Mess with Amazon After Private Complaint Draws Lawsuit Over
Textbooks” Johnathon Fitzpatrick. Seattle Weekly Blog. Mar. 5 2012. Accessed at: (http://
blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2012/03/amazon_and_college_bookstores.php) on 3/7/12 (arguing
Amazon is entering the school-textbook industry, including college-level textbooks, and aggressively
competiting against existing textbook publishers).
13 For the current free legal textbook offerings, see the e-Langdell Bookstore at: (http://elangdell.cali.org/).
8
9. T. LaBadie
other international law students.14 The Hack the Casebook movement is not limited to the
demand-student side. On the supply side, it also aims to create an online database of eBooks
with other professors and legal-education professionals in order to promote scholarship and
pedagogy.15 Thus, the technology is still quite young, and a lot of experimentation is occurring,
especially with top “brands” and leaders in the legal education market.
So the eBook, at least with respect to legal education, is not exactly sure what it wants to
be when it grows up. There are many exciting possibilities and benefits that eBook can
potentially offer, but no company or law school has cracked (or hacked) the casebook. The vast
majority (the mainstream) of law school, professors, and students still use traditional textbooks
or their digitized counterparts. Thus eBooks fit neatly into the early adopter category in the
Crossing the Chasm model: getting across the chasm into mainstream adoption is perilous. It
requires change and adaptation of the technology; determining where the technology works and
where it does not so it can produce benefits for the mass of consumers—a painstaking and
delicate process.
When policy follows a technology down the Chasm…
Not only do companies and technologies fall into the chasm, but public spending and
law-encouraging policies will of course fall with technologies that do not reach the mainstream.
For instance, green technology, offers a plethora of potential benefits: less harm to the planet, to
14See “The Future of Law Libraries: The Future is Now?” John Palfrey’s Blog at Berkman Center, Harvard
Law School. Accessed at: (http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/palfrey/category/elangdell/) on 2/8/12. See also
“Robert Darnton on books, ebooks, Google Books, and the DPLA.” The Harvard Library Innovation
Laboratory at Harvard Law School. Accessed at: (http://librarylab.law.harvard.edu/blog/2011/10/17/robert-
darnton-on-books-ebooks-google-books-and-the-dpla/) on 3/5/12.
15 Ibid.
9
10. T. LaBadie
humans, independence from unsavory suppliers and governments, such as Iran, Venezuela, and
so forth. Yet, policymakers who have encouraged specific ‘winners’ have watched public
resources follow many green technologies into the chasm.
Thus, policymakers are faced with a dilemma: (1) emerging, nascent technologies are
renowned for falling into the chasm (and the public resources with them) and so this is
notoriously hazardous territory to encourage a technology; while (2) as will be shown further,
eBooks are extremely promising for a market that is hurting, and so it is difficult for a
policymaker to sit idly by and wait for the market to ameliorate legal education.
A complicating factor for policymakers is that it seems certain enough that the
technology beats the current offering—the traditional casebook. Though one can list various
benefits in the abstract (better content, accessibility, etc.), probably the best way to illustrate
some of the more predictable or likely benefits, uses, and application of eBooks is through a brief
narrative. This narrative will also serve to illustrate both the likely demand from both students
and professors; and why on the supply side companies such as Amazon, CALI, Apple, and
Harvard see eBooks as a huge opportunity.
Potential Benefits: eBooks in Action
Amelia, a second-year law student, leaves to attend the first day of her evidence class.
She has recently transferred to a school that uses eBooks in most of its courses. She likes
technology in general, and this particular school attracted her in part because it is more tech-
friendly than most other schools, and indeed, her old one. She remembers hauling up to 40
pounds of books around on any given day. Today, instead, she throws her three-pound laptop (or
10
11. T. LaBadie
even her tablet computer on a “light” day) into a small satchel, and walks to class. She arrives,
and the professor starts the discussion. The assigned reading was a case that students accessed
for free on Google Scholar, or if they preferred, other sites (FindLaw, Justitia, Scotus, etc.). She
actually read a good portion of the case on her smartphone while in the waiting area at her
doctor’s office yesterday. She was glad she was able to do so study and read in situations like
this without conspicuously and perhaps awkwardly carrying around an 800-page red Evidence
casebook with her to her physician’s office or while waiting in a line at the grocery store.
The instructor starts going over the administrative details for the class, starting with the
syllabus. The syllabus, built into the “textbook”, is conveniently on the first page of the eBook.
Amelia is struck by several things: first, she did not have to pay for expensive casebooks
(sometimes upwards of $150 per class), whether new or used. The eBook was free. Nor did she
have to wait in line at a bookstore or wait for shipping; she was able to access it instantly when
the professor emailed her the link to access it. Next, the eBook includes sections for outlining,
various schemas and graphics for concepts in the class, and more; she realizes that she won’t
have to waste time searching through emails, papers, or her desktop to find these key reference
materials as the semester progresses. She realizes that she actually wasted a lot of time doing so
during her first year.
The professor concludes the “administrivia”, and begins the substantive discussion. The
class discusses the case. Near the close of the discussion, the instructor directs the class’s
attention to an article in the ABA Journal that Amelia had “tagged” while reading the case, which
discussed the recent use and possible impact of fMRI (or neurological lie detection) and its
admissibility in courts. The instructor had previously urged eBook adoption for reasons such as
11
12. T. LaBadie
this: in the past with a regular book, it was difficult to stay on top of recent developments in the
law and technology, especially with fast-changing law, such as criminal procedure. Often,
textbooks would be totally silent on emerging legal issues, and at best, would only pose simple
questions, such as: “How, if new brain-scan technology came about, would this affect the legal
rule and application thereof.” In contrast, this article can be incorporated immediately into the
course or into subsequent iterations of the e-book. Further, the professor thought it might engage
students more if they could take a more active role in contributing content to class discussions
via eBooks. Lastly, the professor thought that eBooks would increase her own knowledge
sharing and collaboration with colleagues.
Later that night, as Amelia is studying for the next day, she comes across a 15-minute test
designed to pinpoint a particular students strongest and weakest learning styles. She thinks this a
little odd based on her law-school experience so far, but decides to do the exercises. She finds
out that that visual learning is actually how she learns best, and is a bit weaker on reading—the
far-and-away standard of learning legal content. She finds helpful, interactive schematics within
the eBook. Accordingly, she works with this visual presentation of the material initially to get a
handle on it before moving on to the actual text of the case. Over the course of the semester, she
finds this improves her understanding of legal material, while being a faster way to study.
When she opens the text of the case, she finds several notes and queries that the professor
has provided to direct students to the primary significance of the material. At the end of the
each case or schema, there is a summary or takeaways section. So she can jot down her
thoughts, brief the case, or whatever which will methodically build her outline and help her
study. The eBook software even allows her to quickly produce note cards of the summaries
12
13. T. LaBadie
quickly, so students can adapt them to their purposes. For example, she writes, “What does
Daubert stand for?” and writes her summary of the case. She then bookmarks the schematic for
future studying reference if she is having trouble grasping the case when she returns to review it
and when preparing for finals, which are a full three-and-a-half months away. There is also a
link in the eBook for a forum, which can range from “comments” on a case that you might find
in reading a New York Times article, to more social-media or Facebook-like platforms, where
questions can be posted, resources tagged, and so forth. Further, she can annotate, highlight text
with the colors of her choice, and even “draw” lines and schematics on the page (e.g., a matrix or
flow chart).
Lastly, throughout the term, she completed exercises based on bar-prep software that
showed her which areas she was strong and weak in. She found that she was weak on character
witnesses in evidence, so she allocated her study time accordingly. She remembers that during
her first year, she experienced realizing that she was weak on products liability only when
studying for finals during the last two weeks of the course. Further, she can save this
information when later studying for the bar, in about a year-and-a-half’s time. Moreover, the
professor and administrators can also access this information to see what students are learning
well, or are not. Later on that semester, her car was broken into. But she was still able to access
the technology in the cloud. By the end of the term, she also realized that she used a lot less
paper (not only book-wise), but also in terms of printing and copying. She liked the thought of
leaving a lighter footprint during the last year. 16
16Assuming the pages not printed outweighs the energy and production costs of the e-content, software,
and infrastructure.
13
14. T. LaBadie
eBooks offer an array of potential benefits
It is clear that eBooks have great potential to increase the quality and convenience of
legal education. Again, the potential benefits are so substantial that some policymakers may
want to formally encourage or “push” the technology. And even though eBooks are still young,
there is already some precedent for aggressive adoption of eBooks, albeit at the primary and
secondary school level. In a rather aggressive move, the Florida legislature has mandated that
all of its public schools to adopt eBooks by 2015.17 The question is then raised: If the
technology is so great and given the environment in legal education, why shouldn’t policymakers
“push”, however, law schools to adopt eBooks?
“Potential means you ain’t done it yet…”18
There are three broad reasons why the law should not, at this point, intervene and
champion the adoption of eBooks. First, the technology is yet too young and incipient for
policymakers to encourage it effectively. Second, even if policymakers can target the right kind
of eBook technology to encourage, the mechanisms or channels (e.g., subsidies, incentives, tax
breaks, all-out mandates) are not as effective as other market-based options. Third, even
assuming these threshold hurdles at the policy level can be overcome, there are many reasons to
believe that many law schools will face numerous pitfalls in implementing eBooks successfully
on the ground. As with so many things, good conception is not enough. Implementing is where
the devil of it is.
17 “Follow Florida's Lead: Why More States Should Switch to Digital Textbooks in Schools Now”. Liz
Dwyer. June 17, 2011. Good Education. Accessed at: , http://www.good.is/post/follow-florida-s-lead-
why-more-states-should-switch-to-digital-textbooks-in-schools-now/on 2/28/12.
!18 Vince Lombardi.
14
15. T. LaBadie
I. Difficulties in Encouraging eBooks at the Policy-making Level – Picking Winners
and the Policymaker’s Hippocratic Oath
Defining Terms: “subsidy”
There are a number of options and mechanisms for encouraging law schools to adopt
eBooks, including tax breaks, subsidies, prizes, grants, or all-out mandates to adopt (including
“best available” or output-defined schemas). These technology-encouragement methods,
whether, in the form of a tax credit or grant or otherwise will be termed “subsidy” or
“subsidizing” herein.
Policymakers often must steer between two dangers that are attendant to encouraging
technology. One is the “picking the winner” problem (backing solar energy over wind turbines,
e.g.). The second and related danger is that subsidizing a technology might unintentionally hurt
innovation and the development of a technology overall. Call this the “myopic subsidy” mistake.
Once policymakers decide to subsidize, they could easily earmark improvements for a particular,
often a too narrow or limited, use of the technology. When the subsidy becomes available,
market participants often “rush in” to secure windfall. Particular, as here, when a technology is
young and nascent, the danger that policymakers will not be able to anticipate what direction a
technology take is great. Such early technology subsidies can risk distorting, stunting, or
blighting the development of the nascent technology.
Proponents of subsidizing eBooks may rightly point out that, in view of this danger, a more
general subsidy might fix the problem; why not gently push the adoption of eBooks, thus
avoiding the pitfalls of constricting the development of eBooks at this early stage? In such a
15
16. T. LaBadie
broader subsidy scheme, law schools or eBook developers might receive general “R&D”
support, whereby institutions that adopted or developed eBooks in general would be rewarded.
The problem with this approach is that the subsidy might produce the “token eBook” problem, as
described below.
Here’s your token eBook.
Although a broad subsidy for eBook adoption would avoid the “myopic subsidy”
problem, it would run into the problem of giving away subsidies too lavishly—without the
requisite ROI. This again underscores the difficulty of encouraging nascent, emerging
technologies. For example, would policymakers define “eBooks” as merely digitized books? If
so, what is the value there? A human standing at a scanner with a stack of papers can produce a
digitized book. Further, Westlaw and Lexis already produce digitized books, albeit with
rudimentary annotative capabilities for students. Perhaps one could mandate that the eBooks
must be “interactive.” But how far does interactive go? Does it include video? Real-time
collaboration and annotation between students and professors? Does it include a social media
component?...And so on. The point is that no one at this point can be sure exactly what eBooks
ought to look like, or whether a given vision of an eBook will garner the requisite return on
investment (ROI).
Thus, the incipient nature of eBooks at this point should make policymakers very reticent
to formally encourage eBooks at this point.
II. Legal Mechanism and Vehicles to Push Adoption
16
17. T. LaBadie
If, however, some policymakers are confident enough that they can actually accurately
and effectively encourage eBooks at this early stage, what are the best legal mechanisms
available to spur eBook adoption?
From the outset, it should be kept in mind the range of mechanisms to “force” law
schools are limited compared to most public or educational institutions. Most law schools are
private, with only a relatively small proportion being public.19 Moreover, there is a trend for
public law schools to “privatize” by foregoing state subsidies, so public law schools are
becoming rarer as time passes.20 That limits the degree, practically speaking, to which they can
be pushed into eBook adoption by public institutions by fiat, as in the case of Florida mandating
all-out adoption for several reasons. There is little precedent for political intervention in
intervening in pedagogical aspects of graduate schools, unlike with primary and secondary
education. But perhaps the biggest problem with actually channeling subsidies to law schools to
adopt eBooks is a political and normative issue.
Hard Times for Law Schools, but Harder Times for the “99%”
Perhaps the biggest practical threat to the channeling subsidies to law schools would be
the political and public-relations (PR) problem that would result. The Great Recession has
resulted in protracted high unemployment and squeezed very many public institutions, notably
primary and secondary public education. Negative PR or public perception is an important force
because it might prevent passage of technology encouragement from the get-go. Or, even if it
!19 There are roughly 255 active law schools in the U.S., 200 of which are accredited by the ABA.
20“Law School Debt Bubble, Part II: Data Show Feds Will Lend $54.3 Billion to U.S. Law Schools by
2020”. Matt Leichter. Dec. 5, 2011.
17
18. T. LaBadie
passes, may result in bad press and a backlash. Is it really likely that the public would support
subsidies to law students and law schools in this economic milieu? One could try to explain that
it helps students learn more effectively, which in turn, could mean better legal services for the
public. In theory the public could endorse that round-about benefit. But the far more likely
outcome is that the public would see it as pork to a special interest. Add to the fact that the vast
majority of legislators are lawyers, and this perception seems even more likely still. Nor, even,
can policymakers plausibly argue that benefits to law schools will redound to the average Joe, in
terms of job creation or stimulus.
In sum, at a time when lawyers are not exactly seen in a kindly light by the public, yet
another blemish against the profession should be avoided. This factor militates against delivery
of a subsidy though tax credits, grants, and so forth. It’s hard to imagine a political climate more
inclement to publicly aiding law students and law schools.
The best option: ABA as the Encouragement Vehicle
How about the ABA as a vehicle to promote eBook adoption? The chief virtue of the
ABA is it has public-like power as an accreditor, but is not directly funded by taxpayers. So it
can insist or push eBook adoption (or technology forcing) without all the PR problems or
political hang-ups. Additionally, most states have handed over accreditation power to the ABA,
and the ABA accredits almost 80% of the existing U.S. law schools. So most law schools are
squarely within its jurisdiction, so to speak. As such, the ABA is a sound vehicle. And quite
reasonably, it may be argued that the ABA can effectively encourage eBook adoption by feasible
18
19. T. LaBadie
means, such as requiring law schools to adopt eBooks in five years or to require a certain
percentage of classes (say 10 to 15%) must experiment with eBooks in a given timeframe.
Thus, it appears that the ABA is a plausible, reasonable vehicle for encouraging eBooks,
assuming that policymakers insist on encouraging eBooks at this very early, risky stage. But
policymakers still face one final obstacle: adequately planning for real-world implementation.
This is perhaps the single biggest pitfall for policymakers.
III. Barriers to Adoption and Implementation
Many a slip twixt the cup and the lip…
Assuming the foregoing policymaking hurdles can be overcome, and a sufficient subsidy
or push is fashioned and a workable mechanism in place, such as the ABA, will the pro-
encouragement drive succeed on the ground? How is it likely to play out in the real world?
Law schools are somewhat unusual creatures, and differ from your typical competitive,
free-market firms a great deal. Of course, some implementation challenges and opportunities
law school will share with any other type of institution or business, and some are unique. What
every institution shares, however, is that substantially changing an organization is extraordinarily
difficult.
But there are additional reasons why eBook adoption will be especially difficult for a
very many law schools. The first reason is the governance structure of law schools. Governance
is divided between administrators and faculty. Hence, even if it were an advisable strategy, it is
practically impossible for administrators or even key law professors to impose eBooks on
unwilling or lukewarm colleagues in top-down, command fashion. So though change is
19
20. T. LaBadie
notoriously difficult in businesses generally, is a fortiori, even more so in a university setting,
where faculty buy-in, consensus, and commitment are particularly crucial.21 Even schools that
have administrators or deans who are highly motivated to adopt have less incentives at their
disposal than normal businesses to effect change.22 This again underscores the fact that good
technology is not enough. You have to convince the laggards and the conservatives to cross the
chasm. In the law-school context, chief among those are faculty law professors. Not all law
schools will be able to secure this buy-in to adopt and experiment with eBooks. Of course, even
the most stubborn professor cannot reasonably argue against rules imposed from the outside,
such as accreditation. Rules may require that a law school complies, but rules cannot assure that
a law school will implement well. Quite the contrary, faculty members can drag their feet, make
the adoption seem absurd and ludicrous to students, staff, and colleagues. And, as argued below,
even if faculty is completely willing to give adoption a try, they may execute eBook adoption
terribly.
And even if most faculty and administrators do buy in, not all schools will have the same
technological abilities, nor will all schools have the same or even adequate technological
infrastructure. New software is well-known for going through often lengthy beta processes
before it is “fit for widespread consumption.” Subsidies may induce certain schools to bite off
more than they can chew. If these beta-type difficulties are keen enough, it might sour students,
staff, and administrators on eBooks for some time to come. This would manifestly be the
opposite result of promoting eBooks.
21Eating Our Cake and Having It, Too: Why Real Change Is So Difficult in Law Schools. Nancy B.
Rapoport. Indiana Law Journal. Vol. 81:359. p. 362, fn. 9, 370.
22 Rapoport, p. 363, fn. 11, 370.
20
21. T. LaBadie
If you Insist…A Modest Proposal
The substantial barriers to implementation, outline above, raise an important point.
Overall, many law schools are probably not well positioned to adopt the new technology, at least
not now, nor probably in the short term. Therefore, a modest spur is a very reasonable option to
either overcome institutional inertia. Therefore, policymakers who do not trust market-like
solutions, competition, and emulation to ensure that eBooks cross the chasm, should opt for a
prize or award.
An advantage of this quite modest approach is that it answers the concern that time is of
the essence, and that debt-heavy law students need speedy relief. Precisely because an award or
prize is a modest, even one-time, encouragement it can be implemented much more quickly than
the slow churn of bureaucracies (such as the ABA) or, even slower, the machinery of
government. Although it is far from certain that timely relief is really any longer needed (law
school admissions are dropping sharply, which, cet. par., will force law schools to compete very
harder for a shrinking pool of students23), this would answer the timeliness concern. How would
such this modest push—an award or prize—system work?
The award could be conferred on a group of top schools. The schools could be chosen by
a cross-section of general educators, law professors, practicing lawyers, judges, students,
technologists, and others. Media attention would be essential, even if only limited to trade
publications, like the ABA, or on law-school or legal-technology Blawgs. Even if schools do not
“win”, it could build up tech capacity and know-how, spur innovation, without the dangers of
23“For 2nd Year, a Sharp Drop in Law School Entrance Tests”. David Segal. New York Times. March 19,
2012. Accessed at: (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/20/business/for-lsat-sharp-drop-in-popularity-for-
second-year.html) on 4/7/12.
21
22. T. LaBadie
penalties. So a school would be better off even if they didn’t receive a gold, silver, or bronze
medal, so to speak. It may also encourage or jumpstart market innovations by encouraging law
schools to bring in consultants or partners. For example, a school or a group of schools might
launch a pilot program with Apple’s eBooks offering. It might also generate awareness of the
potential benefits of eBooks, interest in eBooks, and perhaps a start a conversation regarding the
“new normal” of legal education.
This modest approach has the advantage of the “if you build it, they will come”
strategy24, which demonstrates to other law schools and eBook providers that a technology can
actually work well in practice, on the ground. Perhaps because of the mimicking, “me too”
nature of the law-school market in general25, the prize should include top tier schools as well.
Thus, priming the pump this way would probably be the most effective way for eBooks
to cross the chasm. This would also minimize the negative PR risk as the prize or award could
be quite modest, in all probability raised with private funds (perhaps through the ABA and other
legal or trade organizations). Perhaps the main incentive would be publicity, the opportunity for
law schools (especially for mid- and low-tier) to differentiate themselves, given that the vast
majority of schools are in the “undifferentiated middle”.26
Concluding and Summary Remarks
eBooks are a potentially valuable, worthwhile technology that can substantially increase
the quality and delivery of legal education for students, professors, and administrators. But, in
24 Credit to Professor Vincent Chiappetta at Willamette University College of Law for the term.
25 Rapoport, p. 362.
26 Rapoport, p. 365.
22
23. T. LaBadie
considering whether and how to encourage eBooks, policymakers should be cautious of doing “a
good thing foolishly.” This essay has argued that there a variety of such pitfalls attendant upon
encouraging eBook adoption. Therefore, especially at this incipient stage, the question and
means of adoption should be left to the market, or to individual law schools. But entropy is a
powerful force. Hence, if policymakers insist on encouraging the technology, they should limit
themselves, and do so by means of a modest award or prize to counteract the institutional
lethargy of some law schools.
23