I agree with all of this.  I think that what has been discussed, including
the thing that I said, are all factors, but those can all be changed.
I have been teaching from a "management" perspective for many years.  It is
very difficult to get out of the law school mode, and I fall back into it
periodically.  It takes a real effort to change the way we approach our job
in a school of business.  I agree that the books have changed and need to
change even more.  I also have published in management journals and have
co-authored with other non-law faculty.  That has changed the perception at
the school where I taught for eighteen years.
However, the change that occurs on a one-to-one basis, or even in a school,
is not as quickly carried to the overall perception among administrators,
accrediting agencies and others who make judgments.  I can get "respect"
from my colleagues, but that does not necessarily translate to respect for
other business law professors.  People aren't willing to expand their minds
like that.
I have students waiting to talk to me right now, so I will stop - probalby
have said enough anyway.

At 01:42 PM 10/29/99 -0400, you wrote:
>I have seen a lot of discussion recently of relatively petty reasons for our
>perceptions of second class status.  To some degree, I agree with those
>reasons, but I also think we need to accept some responsibility ourselves.
>Many of us still teach the way we and every possible adjunct was taught in
>law school.  We teach in a negative mode by looking predominantly at cases
>where a business was sued, instead of a positive mode where legal factors
>were use to gain competitive advantage (e.g., General Motors-Toyota joint
>venture).  And we focus our teaching predominantly on legal analysis, which
>while important, is lost on our students and colleagues, if not related to
>better management.  I think our texts have made significant improvement in
>recent years, but we still have a long way to go.
>If we want to earn the respect of our colleaques, why don't we publish more
>in their journals where their editors and reviewers will force us to be
>relevant.  Few business faculty read law reviews.
>At Babson, people get very nervous if we have more than a few law adjuncts
>teaching fundamental courses because it is believed they don't teach the way
>the full time law faculty teach.
>If we don't want to be replaced by adjuncts, we need to show how the way we
>teach is better for business students than the teaching of most adjuncts!
>Practicing attorneys who are adjuncts likely offer a wealth of informantion
>about case law, litigation tactics and costs, and compliance advice.  We
>should have the advantage in relating say antitrust law to competitive
>strategy such as Porter's five forces, or securities law to a firm's
>financing strategy.
>Ross Petty
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Fran Zollers <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Thursday, October 28, 1999 5:26 PM
>Subject: Summary
>
>
>>A few other arguments come to mind as I read the contributions to the
>>discussion so far.  I summarize the previous messages and their
>>arguments against having law as a fundamental part of the business
>>curriculum as follows:
>>
>>1.  Adjuncts are cheaper and you can get them by the dozen to teach
>>law.  (I add that, unlike other fields, our adjuncts are terminally
>>qualified, which makes deans smile.  I suspect our colleagues think that
>>
>>anyone can teach law and that we find these folks at the bus station,
>>but no one has ever said that to my face).
>>
>>2.  There is no obvious career path for someone coming out of business
>>school with a law major.
>>
>>3.  PhDs look down their noses at "mere" JDs.
>>
>>I hope I haven't left anyone out.  To the above I would add the thought
>>that law, as seen by our colleagues, is actually antithetical to
>>business.  It is, after all, the law that imposes restrictions on
>>business and how it operates.  We are seen as the folks who say no all
>>the time.  We mess up our finance colleagues' notion of perfect markets;
>>
>>we throw roadblocks in front of our manufacturing and marketing
>>colleagues. And we can make grown accounting professors cry.  I suspect
>>they think that if we really believed in business, we would have chosen
>>a different discipline.  Last, we are, afterall, lawyers.  Most of us
>>don't call ourselves that, but our colleagues sure do.  Quite apart from
>>
>>the bad feelings our colleagues have for the profession in general, they
>>
>>sure as heck don't want us out there producing baby lawyers through our
>>classes.
>>
>>There's my two cents.  It's quitting time.  Time to go home, everyone.
>>
>