MAKING THE PRACTICE OF LAW THERAPEUTIC FOR LAWYERS Lawyer

Document Sample
MAKING THE PRACTICE OF LAW THERAPEUTIC FOR LAWYERS Lawyer Powered By Docstoc
					LAWYER PERSONALITY, THE FUTURE
 OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION, & THE
 COMPREHENSIVE LAW MOVEMENT




                                         Susan Daicoff
                Professor, Florida Coastal School of Law
      Guest Lecture, University of Florida College of Law
                                             March, 2010
       A TRIPARTITE CRISIS

Deprofessionalism and incivility

Low public opinion of lawyers and the legal system

Lawyer distress and dissatisfaction
            ABA SURVEY - 1993
            Peter D. Hart Research Associates

    80%                                 78%
                      63%
    60%
                                    40%    45%
    40%           36%
            19%22%                                    16%
    20%                                          7%
     0%
                    1993 Peter D. Hart Survey

Caring and Compassionate         Honest and Ethical
Constructive Part of Community   Make Too Much Money
Are Greedy                       Charge Excessive Fees
Lack Necessary Ethics            Not Honest or Ethical
Liked Own M.D.                   Liked Own Attorney
Disliked Own M.D.                Disliked Own Attny
PUBLIC OPINION POLL - 1991
                                               Lawyers
70%        62%
                                               Pharmacists
60%            50%
                                               Doctors, College Teachers, Clergy,
                                               Dentists, Engineers
50%
                   35%                         Funeral Directors, Bankers,
                                               Journalists
40%
                                               Newspaper Reporters
       22%             24%
30%                       20%
                             16%               Building Contractors
20%                             12%
                                          6%   Realtors
10%
                                               Advertisers

0%                                             Car Salesmen
      High Honesty or Ethical Standards
                DEPRESSION
      Among Law Students & Lawyers
45%
40%                                40%
35%
30%                   32%
25%
20%                                            17.90%      19%
15%
10%       10%
          9%          9%           9%          9%          9%
 5%
 0%
       PreLaw    1st Year     3rd Year     2 Yrs     0-78 Yrs of
                                          PostGrad    Practice

                Lawyers     General Population Maximum
             ALCOHOLISM
      Percentage of Alcoholic Drinkers
18%    18%
16%
14%
12%
10%
              9%
 8%
 6%
 4%
 2%
 0%

               Lawyers   General Population
 PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTRESS
                        Beck, 1995-96

 30% 30%             27%
 25%
 20% 18% 21%
                         16%
 15%
                   10%       11%
 10%            7%
  5%                                                 2.27%
  0%
      Male Lawyers Female Lawyers        General
                                        Population

Global Distress             Anxiety
Depression                  Paranoid Ideation
Interpersonal Sensitivity   Social Isolation & Alienation
Obsessive-Compulsiveness    Hostility
CAREER SATISFACTION
Satisfaction With the Practice of Law

            20.60%
                              Very Satisfied

                     6.90%    Somewhat Satisfied

                              Somewhat
51.20%                        Dissatisfied
                     21.20%
                              Very Dissatisfied
GROWING DISSATISFACTION?
        Summary of ABA/YLD Surveys



30%
                               Somewhat
20%                            Dissatisfied
                        17%
10%          14%               Very Dissatisfied
  12%
  3%         5%         7%
0%
 1984        1990       1995
         LAWYER DISTRESS:
           A Constant 20%?




                                                             n
                                                             o
                                                         cti
30%




                                                         a
                                                     isf
                                                   at
25%             n




                                                   iss
               o


                            ism
           ssi




                                               ss D
                          l
            e


                       ho
         pr




                                              e
20%                    co




                                          str
      De


                    Al




                                       Di
                                                                  All Lawyers

                                    h.
15%
                                    yc
                                  Ps                              General Population
10%

5%

0%
      Depression    Alcoholism       Psych.     Dissatisfaction
                                    Distress
                  THE “LAWYER
                  PERSONALITY”
                    need for achievement;
    pessimism?      ambitious under stress       materialism; value
                                                 economic bottom-
competitiveness           DRIVE TO               line
                          ACHIEVE

                                                    “Thinking” MBTI
  aggressive          INTERPERSONAL                    preference
 under stress         RELATING STYLE


     dominance                                  “rights” orientation

                  interpersonal insensitivity
Testosterone Levels: Lawyers, Blue
Collar Workers, and Other Professionals

    90                            90
    80
    70
    60                                     Professionals
    50
    40                                     Lawyers
    30                27.4
           20.4                            Blue Collar
    20
                                           Workers
    10
     0
      Professionals          Blue Collar
                              Workers
      THINKING/FEELING
 (Myers-Briggs Dimensions - Richard, 1994)
  19%
                              34%


                                          66%
          81%
Lawyers - Male                Lawyers - Female


                                          35%
40%
                   Thinking
                   Feeling
           60%                65%


  Most Males                    Most Females
     “THINKING” vs. “FEELING”
      Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Dimensions

   THINKERS: value justice, rationality, truth, &
    objectivity; decisions don’t reflect own personal
    values; can be cold & calculating; good problem-
    solvers
   FEELERS: value harmony, interpersonal rel’ps.,
    praise & mercy; apply their own personal values
    to make decisions; seek to do what’s right for self
    & others; sensitive to the effect of decisions on
    others
           MORAL ORIENTATION
      (Gilligan-Based Categories - Weissman, 1994)

        Male Lawyers                     Female Lawyers
                        17%
                                   22%

33%
                                                               43%




                             50%   35%

        Ethic of Care                     Ethic of Care
        Rights Orientation                Rights Orientation
        Balanced                          Balanced
    “ RIGHTS ORIENTATION” vs.
         “ETHIC OF CARE”
               Gilligan-Based Dimensions
   RIGHTS: weighs conflicting rights & duties;
    seeks fairness, justice, & equality; maintains &
    applies rules, standards, & role oblig’ns. to arrive
    at clear, absolute answers
   CARE: contextual; focuses on harm to people;
    seeks to avoid harm, maintain & restore rel’ps. &
    protect others from hurt; decides by assessing
    relative harm to & vulnerabilities of parties
    Myers-Briggs Types of Lawyers
Preference for Introversion, Intuition, Thinking, and
  Judging among lawyers & law students:
  – Private practice lawyers prefer Introversion, Intuition,
    Thinking (NT); ISTJ, ENFP, INTJ ESTP, ISFP, ESFJ, ESFP
  – Judges prefer Thinking, Judging (ST); ISTJ, ESTJ ISFP
  – Admin. Attorneys prefer Intuition, Thinking, Judging (NT);
    INTJ, ENTJ
  – Lawyers similar to corporate executives (TJ)
More Lawyer Studies
   Undergraduates more likely to acquit when
    defense attorney was aggressive & male
   Male and female trial lawyers’ testosterone levels
    higher than nontrial lawyers; lawyers’ levels like
    other white-collar workers’ but trial lawyers’ like
    blue-collar workers’
   Lawyers evaluate options economically ($);
    nonlawyers swayed by psychological factors
                Effects of Law School

   From interest in public interest work to private practice;
    unrelated to student loan amount
   “Ethic of care” disappears (not the same as “Feeling”)
   Subtle fostering of: pessimism, competitive peer
    relationships, Introversion, and Thinking style of
    decisionmaking
   Values shift from intrinsic to extrinsic rewards
   Distress develops (depression, lowered wellbeing)
Krieger & Sheldon Studies

   Intrinsic motivation and community service values
    decreased in the first year
   Appearance values increased in the first year
   Those with the most intrinsic motivations attained the
    highest grades
   But, those with highest grades most often shifted in
    career preferences towards "lucrative" and higher-stress
    law careers, and away from "service"-oriented and
    potentially more satisfying law careers
            More Law Student Studies
   Pessimism linked to high grades & depression
    (bad things all my fault; good things pure luck /
    ISG vs. EUS attributions)
   Optimism linked to low grades
   Introversion & Thinking linked to high grades
   Stress associated with greater ambition,
    aggressiveness, and isolation
       Traits Associated With Lawyer Satisfaction
   “Thinking” Associated With Satisfaction:
    – “Thinking” and “Judging” Associated With Greater Job
      Satisfaction Among Attorneys (Richard, 1994)


   Rights Orientation Correlated With Satisfaction:
    – Rights Orientation Correlated With Career Satisfaction Among
      Female Attorneys (Weissman, 1994)
   Intrinsic Values Correlated with Wellbeing in Law
    Students
    – Krieger & Sheldon
TRADITIONAL LAW PRACTICE

   Competitive
   Aggressive
   Ambitious
   Emphasis on winning (dominance)
   Rights-oriented
   Logical, analytical
   Materialistic, law-as-a-business
    ATYPICAL LAWYER TRAITS?

   “Feeling” Preference on MBTI
   Ethic of Care in Moral & Ethical Decisionmaking
   Altruistic
   Nonmaterialistic
   Collaborative
   Noncompetitive
   Nonaggressive
        THE COMPREHENSIVE LAW
              MOVEMENT:
         Law as a Healing Profession
   10+ “Vectors:”
    –   Therapeutic Jurisprudence
    –   Procedural Justice
    –   Preventive Law
    –   Restorative Justice
    –   Collaborative Law
    –   Problem Solving Courts
    –   Creative Problem Solving
    –   Transformative Mediation
    –   Holistic Justice
    –   Mindfulness Meditation
    –   Others
Precursors: Why now?

   Shift to Post-               Tripartite crisis in legal
    Enlightenment                 profession
    philosophical values         Societal overuse of
    (connectedness,               litigation to solve
    community,                    problems
    globalization)               Influx of diverse
   End of the Cold War           individuals into legal
    (them vs. us mentality)       profession
                 Vectors of the Comprehensive
                 Law Movement
Mindfulness
                                    “TJ/PL”
                                                          Preventive law
  Holistic justice                             Therapeutic
                     Creative problem         jurisprudence
                         solving


                                                   Procedural justice
                         Transformative
     Collaborative         mediation
          law
                                        Restorative justice

                                                   Problem solving courts
   INTERSECTION of the Vectors
1. OPTIMIZING HUMAN
                                                Preventive law
        WELLBEING
                                                Therapeutic jurisprudence
     (harmony, healing,       Therapeutically
                                 oriented
    reconciliation, moral     preventive law         Drug treatment courts;

         growth…)            Creative problem
                                                   domestic violence courts;
                                                       mental health courts
                                 solving                               Law &
  2. ”RIGHTS PLUS:”                    Holistic justice
                                                                  socioeconomics
                                                                Transformative
        FOCUS ON                       Collaborative
                                                                   mediation
                                         divorce law
      EXTRALEGAL                          Restorative justice
   CONCERNS (needs,                                 Procedural justice

   goals, beliefs, morals,
        resources,
       relationships,
        community,
   psychological state of
          mind …)
SubIntersections
   Avoid Interpersonal
    Conflict & “Hardball”
    Litigation
   Share Equal Power
   Collaborative
   Therapeutic
   Interdisciplinary
   Can Be Consistent w/
    Lawyers’ Own Morals
  “Organizational Chart”
  of the Movement
      Lenses:                                            Holistic
                        Therapeutic
                       Jurisprudence                     Justice
    Traditional/
                                   Preventive Law     Religious/
    Adversarial
                                                       Spiritual
(win/lose – binary)      Creative Problem Solving
                                              Procedural Justice
     Processes:
                        Negotiation/Settlement       Collaborative Law
Problem Solving  Evaluative Mediation
    Courts
                                          Restorative Justice
                           Facilitative Mediation   TJ/PL
           Arbitration
                              Transformative           Preventive Law
       Litigation & other         Mediation
      judicial processes
Reform Movements

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then
  they fight you, then you win. –Gandhi

Every truth passes through three stages before it is
  recognized. In the first it is ridiculed, in the second
  it is opposed, in the third it is regarded as self-
  evident. – Arthur Schopenhauer
Integrated vs. Parallel Question:
Parallel Movements


    Complementary and Alternative Medicine
     (CAM)

    Montessori Education
Integration Options
 INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT
Every lawyer/judge does it

 PARALLEL DEVELOPMENT
Specialized lawyers/courts/legal educators do it
    – in boutique law firms, specialized courts, departments of
      larger firms, elective courses


   HYBRID/BOTH?
 Advantages & Disadvantages
Integrated                      Parallel
Universal                       Specialized
Mainstreamed                    Better delivery of CLP
CLP becomes a “best practice”   services
Equal access to all services

Obstacles                       Marginalization
Need for retraining             Lower fees to lawyers
Misuse                          Unequal access to traditional
Paternalism                     & CLP services
“Ups” malpractice standard
     Why Integrate?
   Better, more comprehensive client services
   Better access to a full range of legal services
   Better outcomes for more legal matters
   Optimized client wellbeing and relationships
   Law practice and judging mirrors certain values:
     –   Collaboration                    --Respect
     –   Autonomy                         --Care
     –   Feedback                         --Interaction
     –   Excellent interpersonal skills
     –   Morality                         --Balance
   Lawyers have ways to fulfill certain intrinsic values, such as:
     –   Making a difference
     –   Optimizing human wellbeing
     –   Preserving/restoring relationships, harmony
     –   Problemsolving
     –   Creativity
An Integrated Model
       An Integrated Model
   Intrapersonal: Enhanced self-awareness skills

   Interpersonal: Enhanced communication skills

   Counseling: Integration in legal strategizing

   Dispute Resolution: Enhanced dispute resolution
    processes

   Adjudication: Enhanced disposition options

   Legal Education: Integration in law schools
      An Integrated Model - Examples
   Intrapersonal: Self-awareness
     – Countertransference – Silver (2007)
   Interpersonal: Communication skills
     – With clients – Brooks (2006), Dauer (2005)
     – With lawyers and judges
   Counseling/Decisionmaking w/client
     – Traditional legal analysis and strategies as one of many “lenses” & “processes”
     – Psycho-legal soft spots – Stolle, Wexler, Winick, Dauer (1997)
     – Lawyering with an ethic of care, or rehabilitative or interdisciplinary focus in criminal cases –
       Winick (2006)
     – Utilizing procedural justice or tx compliance concepts in client planning – Wexler
     – Ex: Strategizing about the value of confessions in criminal cases –Ronner (2006)
   Dispute resolution
     – Considering TJ “processes” as options for dispute resolution
     – Ex: Use of apology – Scott (2005), Cohen
   Disposition/Adjudication
     – Circle processes, problem solving courts, etc.
     – Judging with an interdisciplinary, problemsolving, collaborative, bold, engaged, and action-
       oriented approach instead of a more traditional one of restraint, disinterest, and modesty – Bo
       & Singer (2006); Schma (2005)
   Legal education - Winick (2005) (18 U.S. law schools with TJ-type courses – Silver (2006))
The New Legal Skills
     New Intrapersonal Skills
      –   Countertransference
      –   Boundary management
      –   Selfawareness and selfknowledge
      –   Appropriate self-disclosure
     New Interpersonal Skills
      –   Listening
      –   Apology
      –   Social science knowledge (e.g., procedural justice)
      –   Rewind/fast forward
      –   Leadership & teambuilding
      –   Problem solving
     New Dispute Resolution Skills
      – Collaborative law, transformative mediation
      – Restorative justice (circle process)
      – Problem solving courts (DTCs, UFCs, etc.)
     New Judging Skills
      – Interdisciplinary competence
      – Collaboration
      – “tough love”
A New Law School Curriculum

   Teach the entire lawyer’s toolkit
   Teach lenses & processes, explicitly
   Encourage a diversity of approaches
   Teach lawyering skills by including the 4 or 5
    “layers” of comprehensive lawyering skills, as
    defined above
   Perhaps in 2d and 3d year, teach substantive law
    via problem method, using the “org’l chart” and “4-5
    layer approach,” outlined above
Obstacles to Implementation
   current emphasis of legal education
     – extrinsic rewards – Krieger & Sheldon (2000, 2007)
     – “thinking like a lawyer”

   current climate of private law firms
     – emphasis on billable hours & “bottom line”

   lawyers’ and judges’ perceptions of the ethics codes
     – zealous advocacy – MR 1.1, 1.3 vs. MR 2.1

   personality attributes of attorneys
     –   “Thinking” on the MBTI – Richard (1994)
     –   low interpersonal & emotional intelligence
     –   dominance “mask” – Reich (1976)
     –   discomfort with emotional, relational matters
     Overcoming Obstacles
   Modeling excellent comprehensive competencies for lawyers, judges, law
    students
   Recasting comprehensive law as “best lawyering practice” or “leadership”
   Noting:
     – Clients’ dissatisfaction w/ legal system
     – Judges’ dissatisfaction w/criminal recidivism
     – Lawyers’ dissatisfaction with their work
   Collecting client satisfaction data
   Collecting outcome measures (e.g., cost, recidivism, satisfaction, compliance)
   Educating public re: availability of vectors
   Seeking explicit ethics guidance/opinions, if necessary
   Being conscious about integrated/parallel development
   Utilizing recent reports on legal education’s deficiencies to
    propel curricular development
               CONCLUSIONS

   “Lawyer, Know Thyself”
   Goodness of Fit Between Personality and Practice
   Conscious Development of Comprehensive Law
    Approaches Along With Traditional Law Practice
Mentoring Millennials

Susan Daicoff
Professor of Law
Florida Coastal School of Law
        The State of the Legal Profession
        During the Millennials’ Lifetimes
Deprofessionalism and incivility
Low public opinion of lawyers and the legal system
Lawyer distress and dissatisfaction
Rising unemployment
Instability in law firms and clients
Changing client demands, changing lawyer roles
The State of the Legal Profession




            (c) Susan Daicoff, 2010.
Solutions & Responses


                         04

                                         06
   00


        10

                          06

                                        09
             (c) Susan Daicoff, 2010.
Who are the Millennials?
   Birth Years: mid1970s – early 2000s
    (e.g. 1982-2001, acc. to H&S)
   Books by Howe & Strauss:
    – Generations: The History of America’s Future, 1584 to
      2069 (1991)
    – Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation (2000)
   Book: Junco & Mastrodicasa (2007)
   Must Read Law Reviews:
    – Susan K. McClellan, 15 Clinical L. Rev. 255 (2009)
    – Melissa H. Weresh, 61 S. C. L. Rev. 337 (2009)
    – Melody Finnemore, 66-Nov. Or. St. B. Bull 9 (2005)
Proposed Generations
   Lost Generation (1883–1900)
   Greatest Generation (1901–1924)
   Silent Generation (1925–1942)
   Baby Boomer (1943–1960)
   Generation X (1961–1981)
   Millennial Generation/Generation Y/Generation
    Next or Net(1982–1998)
   Generation Z/New Silent Generation/Homeland
    Generation (1999–2019)
           Last Birth Years Historical Time Period
      TheType Century & 6 Generations
Generation
Greatest or GI Hero/Civic                    1901-1924     WWI &              High but
Generation G.I. Generation
         
          Hero (Civic)
                                                           Prohibition        Unraveling
            1901–1924
            World War I/Prohibition
Silent                Artist/Adaptive        1925-1942     Great Depression   Crisis
Generation Silent(Adaptive)
         
          Artist
                  Generation                               & WWII
            1925–1942
            Great Depression/World War II
Baby Boomers Prophet/Idealist                1943-1960     Superpower         High (peace &
            Millennial Saeculum
            (baby) Boom Generation                        America            prosperity)
            Prophet (Idealist)
            1943–1960
Generation X
                       Nomad/Reactive
             Superpower America              1961-1981     Consciousness      Awakening
            13th Generation
             (a.k.a Generation X)1
                                                           Revolution
            Nomad (Reactive)
Millennials
         
         
             1961–1981
                        Hero/Civic
             Consciousness Revolution
                                             1982-2003     Culture Wars       High but
            Millennial Generation2
                                                                              Unraveling
            Hero (Civic)
New Silent
            1982–2003? Artist/Adaptive      2001/2004 -   Economic Crisis,   Crisis
            Culture Wars
Generation                                   present       …
            New Silent Generation 3
            Artist (Adaptive)
???                    Prophet/Idealist
             2004?– present                  ????          The New World      High (peace &
            Millennial Crisis?
                                                           Order?             prosperity)

                        Source: Howe & Strauss (1991)
       Media & Technology Use
     “an increased use and familiarity with communications,
                 media, and digital technologies”
“Next Generation” college students…used technology at higher rates than
  people from other generations:
   97% of students owned a computer
   94% owned a cell phone
   92% of those reported multitasking while Iming
   76% of students used instant messaging
   56% owned a MP3 player
   40% of students used television to get most of their news
   34% used the Internet to get their news.
   This generation spends at least 3.5 hours a day online.
Source: Junco & Mastrodicasa (2007) (who conducted a research study of 7,705 college
   students).
   Now add: social networks: Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin, etc.
What are they doing in class?



                     Facebook
                     Twitter
                     YouTube
                     Online Learning Tools
                     Email
        Trophy Kids/Sense of Entitlement
   Used to “no one loses” and everyone gets a "Thanks
    for Participating" trophy, resulting in a sense of
    entitlement
   Have “too great expectations from the workplace
    and desire to shape their jobs to fit their lives rather
    than adapt their lives to the workplace”
   “Assertively seek more feedback, responsibility, and
    involvement in decision making”
   Resulting “generation & understanding gap”
    between older employees and supervisors in the
    workplace & younger, Millennial employees
Communication With Parents

   College students were frequently in touch
    with their parents –

    – Junco and Mastrodicasa (2007) also found that
      students spoke with their parents an average of
      1.5 times a day about a wide range of topics.
    Anecdotal Characteristics
   Balance: Demand “balance” -- that work and school fit around
    their lives & interests
     – Not ashamed if unprepared in class
   Multimediative:
     – Always use multimedia themselves, e.g., Powerpoint, Youtube, video clips,
       homemade movies
     – Multitask constantly unless they are actively participating in an exercise, role play, or
       presentation
     – Have a very short attention span
     – Pay attention to video clips and sound bites
   Peer-oriented: Prefer to interact in groups rather than 1:1 dating
     – Really excel in projects requiring public presentations of written or oral material
   Need Direction: Demand more structure and certainty in
    assignments and schedules
    Characteristics
   Celebrate & enjoy diversity
   Optimistic/realistic
   Self-inventive/individualistic
   Rewrite the rules
   Killer lifestyle (demand work/life balance)
   Irrelevance of institutions
   Internet is a given; assume use of
    communications, media, & digital
    technologies; multitask fast
   Nurtured; Sense of Entitlement
   Collaborative, teamwork & learning
   Friends = family
     Gen X v. Gen Y/Millennials
      Generation X                                                                                Millennials
      Born 1965-1976                                                                              Born 1977-1998
      51 million                                              Millennial                          75 million
   Accept diversity                                          Law Prof                Celebrate diversity
    Pragmatic/practical                                                                Optimistic/realistic
    Self-reliant/individualistic                                                       Self-inventive/individualistic
    Reject rules                                             Gen We                    Rewrite the rules
    Killer life                                                                        Killer lifestyle
    Mistrust institutions                                                              Irrelevance of institutions
    PC                                                             Video               Internet
    Use technology                                                                     Assume technology
    Multitask                                                                          Multitask fast
    Latch-key kids                                                                     Nurtured
    Friend-not family                                                                  Friends = family
   Mentoring Do’’   s                                                                Mentoring Do’’   s
    · Casual, friendly work                                                            · Structured, supportive work
    environment                                                                        environment
    · Involvement                                                                      · Personalized work
    · Flexibility and freedom                                                          · Interactive relationship
    · A place to learn                                                                 · Be prepared for demands, high
                                                                                       expectations
    Source: The Learning Café and American Demographics enterprisingmuseum 2003.
Greatest Assets
   Work well collaboratively in groups/teams
   Peer oriented (e.g., use of social networks)
   Excel in public presentations and real-life exercises
    (e.g., PR skills assignments)
   Easily use multimedia in public presentations (e.g.,
    SBA awards presentation, 1L projects)
   Innovate - sidestep traditional methods and use
    technology (internet) to achieve goals (e.g., Napster)
   Demand “balance” of work/life/pleasure
   Celebrate cultural diversity
   “Hero/Civicmindedness” qualities
   The next “Great Generation?”
     Mentoring Steps To Take With Millennials
   Give directions and structure and certainty for assignments, samples
   Explain what to expect, reduce uncertainty and do NOT assign meaningless
    tasks, do not assign too much (overwhelming, makes them feel incompetent)
    or too little (makes them feel like you’re wasting their time, which is tight
    already)
   Realize they are timepressured, they value work/life balance, they want time for
    leisure and friends and family, explain when just-in-time learning will work and
    when it will backfire, so they are prepared
   Give immediate, regular feedback laced with lots of praise (sandwich critiques
    between praises)
   Encourage collaborative, team projects in groups, particularly in diverse
    groups
   Encourage their input & presentation in group settings – use weekly staffing of
    cases
   Treat them like peers, don’t insist on respect for authority or tradition, but try
    to fit into a “parent” role with them, since they have great, close relationships
    with parents
   Get ready for them to “ask why,” buck tradition, and propose better ways to do
    things, give them hands-on civic-minded opportunities & meaningful work
   Be transparent, real, & honest about what’s really going on
   Use technology and multimedia and multitasking to accomplish the above
    goals
Mentoring Do’’
             s
   Structured, supportive      Collaborative, team
    work                         learning
    environment                 Personalized work
   Interactive                 Validate importance of
    relationships                satisfaction, fulfillment
   Immediate, direct           Work/life balance
    feedback                    Embrace tech literacy
   Be prepared for             Avoid lecture;
    demands, high                involve/engage
    expectations
Thank you for viewing. All statistical
information derived from empirical
studies conducted by others.


Citations available on request.

        Comments welcome - please e-mail me at
        sdaicoff@fcsl.edu

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:33
posted:9/3/2011
language:English
pages:62