<blockquote>
<h4><span><span><span>“I like good strong words that mean something.” <em>Little Women</em><a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1"><span><span><span><span>[1]</span></span></span></span></a></span></span></span></h4>
</blockquote>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<blockquote>
<h3><span><span><span><span>&nbsp; </span></span></span></span><span><span><span><span>“2Ls tell me this class will end up pretty heavy,&nbsp;</span></span></span></span><span><span><span><span>but I feel good so far. So, when is the other shoe&nbsp;</span></span></span></span><span><span><span><span>going to drop?”</span></span></span></span></h3>

<ol>
<li>
<h4><span><span><span>Introduction</span></span></span></h4>
</li>
</ol>

<p><span><span>My jaw dropped.&nbsp; She nailed it.&nbsp; She explained to our class not just where—but <em>how</em>—this 1L’s memo could be more synthesized, more precise, and more logical.&nbsp; I could not have done it better.&nbsp; </span></span></p>

<p><span><span>Each year growing up, my family did the same thing for Thanksgiving. We’d invite a group of families over to our house, everyone would bring the same set of dishes (candied sweet potatoes!), we’d have a Kids Table and a Grown-Ups Table (Kids Table was always more fun), and then, after dinner, we’d play games.&nbsp; </span></span></p>

<p><span><span>This article offers a potential tool for legal writing professors seeking to quickly orient students to the positive power—and potential peril—of using generative artificial intelligence tools wisely in the practice of law. This article describes a verified, helpful classroom exercise designed to engage students in the critical evaluation of memos or briefs generated by various AI systems.

<p><span><span>I transitioned into teaching Legal Writing in 2023.&nbsp; Early in my first semester, I discussed the now well-known case of <em>Mata v. Avianca, Inc</em>.

<p><span><span>Fewer phrases strike more anxiety into the hearts of many law students as <em>oral argument</em>.<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1"><span><span>[1]</span></span></a> And they are in good company.

<p><span><span>One of the places I find the most joy in teaching legal writing is problem development—writing compelling factual scenarios that give students interesting legal issues to work through is rewarding and fun.&nbsp; The best prompts will motivate students to really jump into their role representing their client and encourage them to think about the “big picture”—how the law ties into social, political, and economic structures in society at large.&nbsp; Much has been written about the best ways to do this in the context of litigation assignments (briefs,

<p><span><span>The American Bar Association now requires law schools to provide <a name="_Hlk170887335">“education to law students on bias, cross-cultural competency, and racism.”</a><a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1"><span><span>[1]</span></span></a> But how can a law professor navigate these challenges in the current cultural climate fraught with polarizing divisiveness?