As AI reshapes the legal profession, law schools are grappling with how best to prepare students for this new landscape. The publications in this section explore how RPS Coach can enhance legal education – not just as a writing assistant, but as a platform for deepening student learning, developing professional skills, and rethinking course design. These articles offer practical strategies, institutional insights, and examples of classroom integration. They also explore the cultural and pedagogical challenges faculty face as they adapt to rapidly evolving technology. Together, these publications serve as a resource for educators committed to teaching with integrity, curiosity, and relevance in the age of AI. Although many of these articles are oriented to legal education, many of the insights and techniques can be applied in other settings.
Even as AI becomes increasingly embedded in legal practice, many educators are hesitant to embrace it in the classroom. This subsection addresses the emotional, cultural, and institutional resistance that faculty may experience when confronted with the need to incorporate AI tools like RPS Coach. These articles aim to normalize that discomfort while offering pathways forward. They acknowledge fears of being overtaken by tech-savvy students, uncertainties around ethical use, and tensions between academic integrity and innovation. At the same time, they encourage faculty to see AI not as a threat, but as an opportunity to model critical engagement, foster transparency, and promote deeper student learning.
Facing Faculty Fears About AI
SSRN (July 23, 2025), 9 pages.
This piece explores a key barrier to AI adoption in education – faculty discomfort. It addresses common – but often unspoken – fears, including being outmatched by students. It also offers candid language, course design ideas, and reminders of past technologies that have become normal parts of our lives. Some faculty feel overwhelmed, underprepared, or simply unsure what responsible use looks like. The article explores these reactions and offers course-specific suggestions for AI policies in doctrinal, writing, skills, clinic, and seminar courses. It cautions that ignoring AI may lead to exactly the kinds of problems critics warn about – students using it poorly, secretly, and without guidance. Instead, faculty can help students develop the habits they will need in a world where AI will be a normal part of their professional lives.
What Do AI and Sex Have in Common?
Indisputably blog (August 23, 2025).
This post urges law faculty to teach students how to use AI responsibly, rather than simply discouraging its use. Using an analogy to sex education, it argues that ignoring AI or hoping students will abstain is unrealistic – and may even increase risks. The post introduces a short instructional video and companion article designed to help students and faculty develop good habits, understand institutional policies, and navigate the benefits and risks of AI thoughtfully and ethically.
Teaching Students to Write Well with AI (Even If You’re Still Learning It): A Guide for Faculty Who Want to Teach – Not Play Detective
SSRN (October 13, 2025), 1 page.
This short guide offers practical strategies to help faculty teach students to think and write more effectively with AI tools. Adapted from the article Did Your Student or a Bot Write This Paper?, it outlines techniques to clarify expectations, promote good writing, and foster critical engagement with AI.
As AI becomes a routine tool in legal practice, law faculty are beginning to explore how it can advance core educational goals. These articles focus on practical strategies for integrating AI into teaching, grading, and course design. They offer specific, actionable strategies for using AI tools to enhance student learning, promote reflective practice, and streamline faculty workloads. Rather than relying on outdated efforts to detect misconduct, these publications encourage educators to build transparent systems that teach students to use AI ethically and effectively. From updating syllabi to designing formative assessments and leveraging AI in simulation-based learning, the works in this section provide a comprehensive guide for faculty who want to keep teaching at the center, even as technology transforms the classroom.
Solving Professors' Dilemmas about Prohibiting or Promoting Student AI Use
SSRN (December 1, 2025), 21 pages.
Faculty face difficult dilemmas as law students increasingly use AI tools like ChatGPT. This article offers practical strategies for addressing dilemmas about whether to prohibit student use of AI, allow it within limits, or actively encourage it to build professional skills. These strategies are designed to promote learning, uphold academic integrity, and prepare students for an evolving legal profession. It provides practical tools including a model AI policy, grading rubric, and a certification form that students can submit with their papers to disclose if and how they used AI.
Teaching with AI — and Teaching Students to Use It Well
SSRN (July 9, 2025), 5 pages.
This article argues that the rapid integration of AI into legal practice creates both an opportunity and a need for legal educators to rethink and improve their courses. Thoughtful use of AI tools in legal education can promote deeper learning, improve student writing, and reveal how students actually think. The article distinguishes between summative and formative assessment and explains how assignments using AI can produce meaningful formative feedback. It offers specific examples of AI-based assignments that help students build core professional skills. It also highlights the importance of teaching students to use AI tools effectively and responsibly.
Did Your Student or a Bot Write This Paper?: Teaching and Grading in the Age of AI
SSRN (October 13, 2025), 10 pages.
AI is disrupting traditional assumptions about law students’ authorship of their written assignments. Faculty are concerned about how to tell whether students are writing their own papers or relying on AI tools like ChatGPT. The article offers practical strategies focused on teaching and grading practices that promote transparency, accountability, and learning. It recommends requiring students to include AI use certification cover sheets disclosing whether and how they used AI tools during the writing process. It also explains how shifting from purely summative to using more formative assessments can provide insight into students’ thinking and help improve their analysis and writing. It suggests that faculty assign shorter, staged tasks and require students to use AI for some of them.
Using RPS Coach in Simulations
Indisputably blog (March 18, 2025).
This post explains how RPS Coach was trained on RPS checklists for mediators and lawyers. It suggests how faculty can use RPS Coach to create simulations tailored to specific learning objectives. It also describes how students can use it to prepare, participate, and reflect on their simulated experiences.
Using AI to Promote Student Learning Through Preparation for and Reflection about Simulations
SSRN (July 17, 2025), 5 pages.
This article includes language for a model assignment for course simulations. The goal is to help students use AI as a tool for thoughtful preparation and meaningful reflection. Students would use AI to analyze roles, anticipate dynamics, and draft reflection papers. Then they would revise the AI-generated drafts using Word’s “track changes” feature, allowing faculty to see their thinking unfold.
AI Can Help Students Learn. You Get Better Papers. And You Know It’s Theirs.
Indisputably blog (April 2, 2025).
This post recommends assigning students to use RPS Coach when writing reflections on simulations or other course activities. By submitting their AI chats, students “show their work,” giving faculty a window into their thinking. The assignment can ask students to distill their ideas into a concise final product, like an open-book quiz with no right answers and nowhere to hide.
How You Can Survive Grading Season (with a Little Help from Your Friend, RPS Coach)
Indisputably blog (April 1, 2025).
This post highlights how faculty can ethically use RPS Coach to streamline and strengthen grading. It can generate first-pass assessments, apply grading criteria consistently, reduce bias, identify patterns in student work, and help produce individualized as well as class-wide feedback. Faculty should review AI output and take responsibility for making grading decisions.
Getting Help from AI to Update Your Syllabus (Even If You Think It's Just Fine)
SSRN (July 9, 2025), 5 pages.
AI tools can help faculty revise their syllabi so students gain relevant, practical skills. With the upcoming NextGen Bar Exam, new lawyer licensing regimes, and the widespread use of AI in legal practice, the context for teaching dispute resolution is changing rapidly. The article encourages faculty to reflect on their syllabi and use generative AI tools to develop thoughtful, efficient updates. It offers practical strategies for adapting to bar exam and licensing developments, incorporating AI skills into courses, integrating representation and neutral perspectives, and redesigning assignments to enhance student learning.
A Video Guide for Teaching Law Students to Use AI Wisely
SSRN (August 20, 2025), 4 pages.
This article introduces a video offering practical guidance on using AI in legal education. It presents a basic introduction to AI and describes how law students and faculty can benefit from AI tools. Because many students already use AI on their own, the video emphasizes the need to teach them how to use it wisely and responsibly. It includes demonstrations of how faculty and students can apply AI in their work. The article provides links to the video, PowerPoint slides, the chat transcript, and related resources.
While individual faculty members navigate their own paths toward integrating AI, law schools across the country are beginning to develop broader institutional responses. These articles highlight early efforts to track and shape these emerging trends. They include empirical data on faculty and student use of AI, a case study of Case Western’s ambitious first-year training initiative, and an overview of evolving approaches across U.S. law schools. Together, these examples illustrate a growing recognition that AI is not a passing fad but a structural shift in legal education – one that calls for coordinated strategies, scalable models, and thoughtful leadership.
Emerging Trends in Law School AI Initiatives
Indisputably blog (July 6, 2025).
This short post identifies nine emerging trends in how U.S. law schools are responding to AI – including course design, faculty development, and institutional policy. It offers a snapshot of the evolving landscape and may help schools develop their own efforts.
Faculty Use of Artificial Intelligence in Teaching
SSRN (October 13, 2025), 18 pages.
This report presents findings from a 2025 survey of U.S. law faculty about their own use of AI tools and how their students use them as well. Most respondents reported using AI at least occasionally for teaching-related purposes, and many estimated that a majority of their students used it in their courses. Faculty identified benefits such as time savings, idea generation, and improved clarity. They also expressed significant concerns about students’ over-reliance on AI and the unreliability of its outputs. Most faculty had revised assignments and assessment practices and provided guidance to students about responsible AI use. However, many felt unprepared to determine whether students had used AI.
Case Western’s Model of AI Education in Law Schools
Indisputably blog (August 10, 2025).
This post highlights elements of Case Western Reserve’s initiative requiring all first-year law students to receive extensive training in AI. Most law schools probably aren’t ready to adopt an initiative as ambitious as Case Western’s. Even so, its program identifies elements that other schools could adopt incrementally.
All In on AI in Law School? A Thoughtful Experiment Worth Watching
Indisputably blog (March 1, 2026).
This post describes Mitchell Hamline Professor Gregory Duhl’s experiment in integrating AI throughout his Contracts course. It’s particularly significant because it challenges the assumption that students should not use AI in 1L courses for fear of undermining the development of legal analysis skills.