"Should professors be on Facebook?"

Dear Millennial Law Prof:

I read the New York Times article, Professor as Open Book; it seems like a lot has been written lately on whether professors should be on sites like MySpace and Facebook. What do you think?

Millennials have an affinity for their parents and other authority figures that previous generations did not share. However, they also have a strong affinity for one another. They're on Facebook to network with each other, not with you. So while I don't think they care whether or not you have a Facebook page, I'm not sure they necessarily want you on theirs all time.

Remember that Facebook is online social networking. And I think it's analogous to offline social networking, i.e., parties, and similar rules apply.

Faculty Only: There are some parties that are just for faculty. Obviously, professors should attend those; it's inappropriate for students to crash.

Students Only: There are some parties that are just for students. Not only is it inappropriate for faculty to crash these, it's creepy.

All Skate: There are some parties that start out as "all skate" parties, i.e., both students and faculty are invited. Those are usually the functions that faculty attend "to be supportive." I'm thinking of the law review banquet, the honors dinners, the "proms." However, after a certain hour, they often revert to a student-only party. I think faculty should attend to be supportive and leave when (or before) it becomes clear that the reversion has occurred.

Celebrations: There are some parties that are for students, but relevant faculty are invited. Sometimes students will have a section party, end-of-year party, or thank-god-the-brief-is-finished party. And sometimes they invite relevant faculty (the profesors who taught their section or the course for which the assignment was just due). These are like the proms (see above), but it takes substantially less time to register our support. Go for 30 minutes; then head out.

The Internet is like a huge hotel with many ballrooms, each of which is hosting a different party. Just because you don't need an invitation to get into each party doesn't mean that crashing is okay with the hosts. I think that social networking and blog sites that are clearly intended to be "faculty only" or "student only" shouldn't be "crashed" by folks in the other group even though you can clearly wander in undetected. If you do wander in undetected, you probably shoudn't assume the privileges of an invited guest. In other words, just because students can read what's on faculty sites and vice versa doesn't mean you should feel free to participate and comment. If you don't think you can read a site that's clearly not intended for you without commenting, don't read it.

So is Facebook a party, or is Facebook a hotel? I think Facebook is now a hotel. When Facebook was restricted to students with a .edu address from a member school, it was clearly a party. However, now that pretty much anyone can be on Facebook and MySpace (which started out as a networking site for musical artists), it's a hotel. So you can go in to Facebook regardless of which party (page) you're going to. Specific Facebook pages, though, are still parties. So this raises two questions:

• Should professors host a party (have a Facebook page)?
• Should professors attend parties (participate in others' Facebook pages)?

Ray Ulmer of TargetX, a college recruiting blog, has this to say:

Millennials want to know the real you — blemishes and all. That
means being less of a control freak, being comfortable with student-generated
content, using communications tools like blogs and social networks, learning to find and tell good stories, identifying the intangibles that differentiate you from your competitors, and other practices that help students know the real you — so they can decide if your school is the right place for them.

I think this is what professors are afraid of, that we have to be on social networking sites to be relevant. But if that's not the real you, then Millennials understand that.

In response to a piece on the Chronicle's Wired Campus, several students commented:

Social media is about people coming to you and making people want to do that. Having a Facebook because you think students might want you to have a Facebook is not going to work because you’re not being “honest,” you’re trying to fit into what you think they want. Having a Facebook because you like the interface and can connect with people builds your own identity and doesn’t base that identity on who you think your students are.

Use it for YOU first, and if it works you won’t be disappointed. If it doesn’t work for you, drop it. Simple. Social spaces in and of themselves are not restricted to age groups or other demographics, but I tend to think of them like partitioned spaces with defined but permeable walls. You can always take a peak, but bear in mind you may not be welcome in the sandbox, biker bar, or frat party.

Sp if you like Facebook or want to try it out, go ahead.

Here's some good advice from Bridget Crawford at Feminist Law Profs:

Professors in cyberspace are receiving some unflattering attention, but being a prof on Facebook and other social networking sites does not automatically put one in the Faculty Who Share Too Much Information category. I find Facebook an easy way to keep in touch with alumni, and I’ve discovered some interesting groups Like “Feminist Bloggers Unite!” and the International Association for Feminist Economics.

And even more good advice from Millennial Professor for those who want to participate in Facebook on a personal level but not to be visible to students:

I have a facebook profile that is private (my students cannot search for me). This profile affords me several benefits: (a) I can communicate with friends from my college years, (b) I can conduct research on facebook with students from other institutions, and (c) I am able to post pictures of family/friends without having undergraduates viewing them.

Be ready to use your good party manners; be prepared for others not to use theirs; and let us know how it goes!

More of those Nice Young People

Starting with Life Before Noon, I stumbled onto a network of Millennial blogs that paint a very different picture of Millennials than the media portrays. These nice young people are much more of what I was expecting (and experiencing for the most part) and far less of what I've been hearing about until very, very recently. Here are a few of their blogs worth checking out (and even recommending to your students; a little peer pressure couldn't hurt):

Penelope Trunk's Brazen Careerist: Advice at the intersection of work and life

Penelope Trunk writes career advice for a new generation of workers. She explains why old advice - like pay your dues, climb the ladder, and don’t have gaps in your resume - is outdated and irrelevant in today’s workplace. She has a reputation for giving advice that is counterintuitive but effective, like take long lunches, ignore people who steal your ideas, and stop vying for a promotion.

Trunk is known for test-driving her advice before spewing it. Her own career choices have been featured by Time magazine and the Guardian as examples of the new issues people face at work today. Both the New York Times and Business Week cited Trunk’s writing as especially in tune with this new workplace. In her personal life, Trunk routinely (often awkwardly) demonstrates buzzwords before they buzz, like the quarterlife crisis, portfolio career, and shared-care parenting.

Her book is Brazen Careerist: The New Rules for Success (Warner Books, May 2007.)

Trunk spent ten years as a marketing executive in the software industry and then she founded two companies of her own. She has endured an IPO, a merger and a bankruptcy. Prior to that she was a professional beach volleyball player.

Brazen Careerist

What’s this site all about?
Remember those college career centers that you never used? You probably wish you had taken advantage of them (like we do), but now (maybe) it’s too late. Well that’s what we’re here for. We’re an online career center aimed at Generation Y — young professionals who want to design and define their careers using the new rules for success.

What’s a Brazen Careerist?
A Brazen Careerist knows that defining your own career, finding the right field, and pursuing it are key ingredients to a fulfilling life. Like the tag line suggests, when you define your career on your own terms first, you control your life.

Where are all the good bloggers?
Right here, of course. The Internet is loaded with talented writers, but there is no way to easily search for them. The Brazen Careerist network is made up of a vibrant, curious and ambitious group of career-minded bloggers, passionately covering a variety of fields: personal development, entrepreneurship, public relations, technology, marketing, and politics, each blog offers a unique, informed perspective to our ever-expanding audience.

Are all the network bloggers writing about careers?
No! We believe that everyone should write about their passion. If your current job isn’t focused on your passion, then you should do whatever you can to turn your passion into your career. Whether you want to be a fashion designer or the next great pro volleyball player, then you should be actively writing and reading about those interests. So join our conversation and make your voice heard!

Twenty Set

Twenty Set was created by Monica O’Brien. Monica originally had the idea to start a blog about topics she was interested in, such as gaining wealth and becoming an adult, in order to build her personal brand and establish a name for herself in social media circles. As a younger member of the twenty set, she struggles with the concept of success and how to achieve it, and wanted to share what she has learned with other people in their twenties who may have the same questions.

Young Go Getter

YGG began as a small forum back in August of 2005. It was originally created as an alternative to the other entrepreneur forums available at that time.

Since then, it’s grown into a large community of young go getters spread across the globe. It’s no longer just a forum. It’s exactly what our tagline says it is, the business playground for entrepreneurs young at heart.

We’re now on version 4 or so, built upon the lessons learned from the mistakes we made in the previous versions and the invaluable feedback from all of our members. It will continuously evolve as we make more mistakes and experiment with the standards implied upon most communities.

Hopefully YGG becomes a daily read for you and enables you to develop contacts and businesses that you normally wouldn’t.

Millennial Women Speak

As with many areas in the blogosphere (except feminism and parenting, it seems), male bloggers outnumber female bloggers. The same is true of blogs by Millennials about Millennials. But I've just found a great blog written by women: "Life Before Noon: A Millenial's Manual."

Life Before Noon is meant to be a voice for and by the Millennial Generation.

All five creators are college seniors with our looming graduation date fast-approaching. We want to foster an environment that promotes a dialogue about Millennials’ transition after college.

Through this dialogue we hope to generate a positive, respectful community that is open to all opinions. We don’t claim to be an authority, but we hope to help guide the conversation, while we ourselves navigate this period of life.

Here's just a sample of what these impressive collegiate women have to say:

On leadership

Leadership is about stepping outside of yourself. While our generation is inherently concerned with failure (myself included), we often focus too much on our personal advancement.

Throughout my college years, I have done minimal volunteer work. Granted I have volunteered a couple hours here and there each semester and donated money to causes, but that’s where my volunteering and philanthropic work ended. I was engrossed in advancing my studies, my activities, my internship, my job, my work, my blog, me, me, me, me. Of course I cared for the community and environment, but I was so overly consumed with advancing myself that I was blind to advancing the people in need around me. I had a case of Millennial passion and fear of failure to the max. I also wanted to wear that fancy suit.

On professionalism

What is professionalism? Wouldn’t it be great if you could buy it in a book, find it on the Internet or take it in pill form?

While trying to find myself over the past 3.5 years, I have transformed from a student into a young professional-in-training by taking several critical steps, mostly without even knowing. By becoming more professional in school situations, I have felt more prepared to enter the working world. Here are a few ways I have tried to become a young professional-in-training while still in college:

Having a mindset of a professional. Go to work, the library and class to get school work done. Set aside other times for socialization on or off campus. Meet with other students to work on group projects in a professional manner. Write e-mails to professors and peers in a timely manner.

Asking questions and listening. Knowledge is power.

Dressing the part. Sweatpants are for the gym and sleeping.

Finding a job or internship. Having a job or internship on or off campus requires the time management that is necessary for success in college and the working world. Jobs and internships allow students to gain technical and interpersonal skills.

Following the “24 hour rule”. Aim to get major assignments done at least a day in advance. This will leave time for editing or review, both in school and on the job.

Getting there early. Follow the old “if you are five minutes early you are on time, if you are on time, you are late” adage.

Having confidence. College is usually a welcoming community. Take advantage of everything your school has to offer, you may gain skills, knowledge and friendships.

I think of professionalism as a mindset that can be practiced in college. By taking simple steps to change our mindsets while in school, hopefully the transition into the real world will come easier during our first”real” job.

And in that post, the headings were even grammatically parallel!

If you want to see the best of what this generation has to offer, check in periodically with Life Before Noon. I wonder if any of the women want to go to law school . . .

Cheater, Cheater, Pumpkin Eater, part 2

Law21, a blog by Canadian lawyer and journalist Jordan Furlong, has an interesting take on the question of cheating versus collaboration. It's interesting to see Xer logic ("be practical; this is how law practice works") applied to Millennial behavior (collaborating in as many aspects of life as possible) on an ethical issue that I don't think either generation full "gets."

All I can say is, I’d love to see the law school that tries to flunk a student for setting up a Facebook study group, as Ryerson University in Toronto did this week. Maybe this is a generational thing — I’m officially an X’er, though my leanings are more millennial — but I can’t see how an online discussion group does anything but facilitate learning, not circumvent it. And more to the point, how it’s any different from students gathering in an empty room on campus to do exactly the same thing. I expect Ryerson will change course within a matter of days.

What strikes me, though, is that the way in which we expect students to accomplish tasks in school is very different from how we actually accomplish tasks in our workplaces. If you’re working on a factum or a memo and you’re not sure about something you’re writing, do you head down to the library for an afternoon of thrashing through the authoritative source materials till you’ve learned what you need, “showing your work” as you go? No. You walk down the hall and ask a colleague who’s more familiar with the subject to explain it to you. It’s faster, easier, cheaper for the client, and almost certainly more effective in understanding the concept.

Teamwork is how things get done now, without exception, in the professional world. Law firms boast about “open-door policies” whereby lawyers exchange ideas with each other, and they make great efforts to pool collective knowledge into KM systems. New recruits are quizzed on their ability to work well in groups and contribute towards successful team dynamics. Corporate deals and major litigation require concerted, collective efforts to achieve goals. Online listservs like Solosez are a lifeline for sole practitioners. Corporate law departments want closer working relationships with their outside counsel. In short, no one succeeds in the legal environment by shunning collaborative efforts.

Yet law schools still devote the majority of their time to testing what an individual student can do on her own, not what she can accomplish in a group setting. Unlike MBA programs, where students work on cases in group after group, many law students can graduate without ever having contributed to a team project, learning how to integrate their expertise into a diverse set of personalities and workflow preferences. If there’s any truth to the old charge that law schools “don’t prepare students for law practice,” it’s not in failing to teach professional skills per se, but in failing to train students to learn from each other, to treat knowledge as a gift to be shared, and to give the best of themselves towards the success of the team.

Any law school that wants to earn a real competitive advantage, in terms of producing graduates ready to professionally collaborate, should think seriously about revamping its curriculum to encourage the academic equivalent of Facebook groups: live, in-person, problem-solving working groups, with rotating memberships to ensure you’re not just working with people you like. Increasingly, lawyers will succeed or fail on their teamwork skills; law schools have an obligation to reflect that.

Cheater, Cheater, Pumpkin Eater

The New York Times offers lesson plans and other tools for educators at its NYT on the Web Learning Network. Of particular interest to me is the one on academic honesty and plagiarism. Setting aside the irony of having the New York Times provide a curriculum on plagiarism (just Google "New York Times" and "plagiarism") and the fact that it's designed for primary and secondary education, it still looks like a handy resource for any professor looking for resources to teach about the ethics of learning. And it couldn't come at a better time.

Certainly cheating and plagiarism have always been with us, but it seems like previous generations at least knew when they were cheating and made a decision to cross the line or not. And previous generations seemed to self-police better (not my particular generation; Xers know that it's only cheating if you get caught). But these days, I hear more and more stories of Millennial students who cheat in various ways but seem to either not know they're cheating or -- because of a scale of moral relativism where some cheating is not as bad as other cheating -- just don't care that they're cheating. The moral relativism concerns me as does the oblivion to which acts are honest and which are dishonest.

I'm wondering if at least a piece of the problem isn't that the word "honor" doesn't seem to mean what it used to. For these kids, "honor" just means smart, as in "Honor Society." You don't have to be particularly honorable to get into the Honor Society; you just have to have good grades. But I hasten to add that no generation makes up its own values out of whole cloth. The Millennials are the product of the generation that raised them . . . Governor Spitzer. Surely the pressure by parents to excel, excel, excel has something to do with the Millennial attitude that cheating just isn't the sin it used to be.

Friday is "Dear Millennial Law Prof" Day!

Dear Millenial Law Prof,

Why do Millenial students feel the need to post their rants anonymously? We other-generation-als are so much more honest when it comes to letting The Establishment know that we are pissed off at them for the bullshit that they have recently pulled. Why don’t Millenials have the guts to use their real names?

Signed,
Ironically Anonymous

First, a healthy skepticism of authority is transgenerational. Boomers said, "never trust anyone over 30." Xers grew up equating "education" with "thought control." Ferris Bueller was cool; the principal was not.

Next, though, the answer depends on what you mean by "anonymously." If you're talking about posting a rant under a screen name that doesn't readily identify the user's real name, I don't know that they necessarily consider that anonymous. I think that's a way to be known to one another without being known to authority figures. Many of them know each others' screen names; we just don't know them.

If you're talking about posting a rant and literally signing it "Anonymous," I think that's motivated by the need to express themselves (in Millennial culture, expressing every thought you have on the Internet is just what they do -- because it's so fast and easy to communicate everything they think, there's not much of a filter as to what should be shared and what should be private) combined with a healthy skepticism of authority. In the eyes of many students, posting a rant anonymously gets you the best of both worlds: you bring a problem to the attention of someone in authority, but you also get to maintain your public persona as a polite do-bee. Also, being a Millennial is a team sport, so they're far less likely than Boomers or Xers to do something that identifies them separately from the group, especially when lodging a "group" complaint.

As far as Xers being more willing to sign their own names to complaints or rants, that's not been my experience. I realize that's only anecdotal, but I don't think that Xers are more likely to put a complaint in writing (either in print or online) and then submit it over their own name. It seems like complaints in writing tend to be anonymous with Xers also. However, I do agree that Xers are more likely to lodge complaints in person with less concern about whether they are demonstrating an appropriate respect for authority. I wouldn't attribute that to courage necessarily; I think it's more of a lack of understanding of social structures and hierarchies. Xers aren't shrugging off the hierarchies they've been taught; Xers just weren't raised to know much about those hierarchies.

Ultimately, though, I think that Millennials have to be taught -- just as the Xers had to be taught -- that anonymous rants or complaints are rarely, if ever, taken seriously by those who have the power to do something about them. A complaint is only as credible as the person lodging it. If the only information we have about the complainer is that he lacks the courage of his convictions to come forward personally, we attribute low or no credibility to him. Therefore, the complaint itself is dismissed as meritless.

As far as a solution, most online discussion boards have a way to block Anonymous postings. So if you won't entertain them, just set the board so that they can't be posted in the first place. Some professors like to allow the Anonymous postings to encourage students to ask questions without being embarrassed. I don't think that's a good idea in law school, where students are training to be advocates. Students need practice in asking for help -- heaven knows they'll need that skill in the legal profession. Some of their future supervisors will be very approachable, and asking for help won't be an issue. Others will make it excruciating to ask for help, and the students need to know how to ask those people for help, too.

If, on the other hand, the anonymous rants are on student-run and student-controlled discussion boards that you have no control over . . . well . . . you have no control over that. I generally won't look at student discussion boards that are intended to be discussions among the students. They need a place to blow off steam. Whether or not I think the forum is appropriate for blowing off steam is beside the point, as far as I'm concerned. I try to respect their privacy even when they don't.

Social Networking as a Force for Good, Millenial-Style

When I think about social networking on the Internet, I remember a line from a movie analogizing something (I've long since forgotten what) to Nitroglycerin -- "it can be used to blow up bridges or heal hearts."

Following up on some of the comments to the post about Internet discussions, here's another great example of how Millennials are using social networking positively: The Chronicle of Higher Education's Wired Campus reports that students are using Facebook to connect in the wake of the shootings at NIU.

In future posts, we can explore more about the differences in how Boomers, Xers, and Millennials use the Internet and, in particular, the differences between how Xers and Millennials use social networking.

"Don't they know that the Internet is public?"

As promised, Friday is "Dear Millennial Law Prof" day, so I've picked what I think is a really great one. Since Millennial Law Prof is only 3 days old, this also happens to be the only question that's been asked, but that doesn't detract from its greatness.

"Dear Millennial Law Prof:" [it really just said, "Hi Tracy," but that doesn't help me indulge my fantasy that this is the part of the movie -- or tv show; I'm not picky -- where there's a montage of me dashing off responses on my manual typewriter in my quaint home office. The music is something perky that suggests that my responses are witty and upbeat.]

"Why do law students post inappropriate material on the Internet? It's one thing to say that students have always talked about each other and their professors and shared personal information and that this is just how they do it. But it's another thing to suggest that posting those same things on the Internet is the equivalent of the student lounge. Do you have any ideas?"

Thanks for the question. My hypothesis on this is that a lot of the inappropriate use was started by Xers and picked up by Millennials and that Millennials will ultimately be the most effective at curbing it and reigning one another in as they become more purely Millennial and less Xer/Millennial hybrids (as people on the cusp of any two generations tend to be). Keep in mind that I'm not opining here about the Constitutionality of restricting Internet speech; I am opining, though, about whether the speech comports with a particular generation's standards of human decency. Here are some examples of why I think we may see less of this as time goes by:

The Chronicle of Higher Education's Wired Campus reported on February 12 that JuicyCampus, a web site opened this past summer to promote campus gossip, is facing some backlash. The Pepperdine University student government has passed a resolution asking administrators to block the site from the campus network.

Pepperdine's newspaper, The Graphic, reports that, while the resolution was passed by an overwhelming majority, students made compelling arguments on both sides:

Many board members came forward and talked about their personal experiences. SGA Vice President of Administration Austin Maness, who wrote the resolution, called the Web site slander and talked about the pain words can bring.

“When I was a kid I was overweight, I was mocked a lot and made fun of,” Maness said. “I developed an eating disorder for three years and was bulimic. And, furthermore, someone on this Web site thought it would be funny to joke about eating disorders and how they thought it was good for girls to develop anorexia so that they could look sexy. And to me it is just unbelievably inhumane.”

* * *

However, not everyone agreed with the final vote. Senior Off-Campus Senator Mike Masten told the voters to not jump to the extreme of banning the Web site but to choose to fight in a different way. He proposed campaigning against the site to promote awareness, and discuss it with people to tell of the true harm such messages can bring.

“I by no means support this Web site, but the reason I opposed the movement was because I guess you can call it a faith in our student body and that they do have the capability to take responsibility for this,” Masten said. “I felt like banning the Web site should be the last resort, if a resort at all, and censorship should never really be that first stop."

What's interesting about this debate (presumably among Millennial students since we're talking about a university student government) is that the opposing sides both concede that the content is inappropriate and should be limited in some way. They just disagree about whether the best method is a ban or a boycott. This is consistent with the civic-minded, collaborative characteristics of this generation. They seem to be protective of one another and mindful of what's best for the community over the individual.

Pepperdine's Graphic also reports that the site was started by Duke law graduate Matt Ivester "with the mission of facilitating an online community where anonymous free speech could be heard on college campuses." (I can only assume that Ivester developed his "mission" after discovering that there was not nearly enough hostile anonymous drivel online to suit his needs. But I digress . . .) As a recent law school graduate, it's most likely that Matt Ivester is an Xer. I think this is interesting, too, and pretty predictable. Xers tend to be more self-referenced than other-referenced, i.e., they don't think a lot about how their actions impact others.

If a website founded by a young male law graduate sounds eerily familiar, perhaps it's because this comes right on the heels of the lawsuit filed by two Yale law school graduates against the site AutoAdmit. I'd guess, based on other characteristics of the founders that indicate their ages, that they are also Xers. Yale's paper reports about JuicyCampus, which has a Yale "channel," that

those who wish to remove a comment have little to no recourse. The FAQ page admonishes users concerned about the truthfulness of items posted on the site to consider whether statements are fact or opinion.

“Facts can be untrue. Opinions can be stupid, or ignorant, or mean-spirited, but they can’t be untrue,” the page reads. Those who object to posts on factual grounds are instructed to give the posts “a big thumbs down” by clicking an icon next to the post to express disapproval.

"A big thumbs down" sounds like entertainment. It has just enough First Amendment-related language for the site to have some plausible deniability about its motives. But really . . . the best way they could think of to champion the First Amendment was to start an online "slam book"? It doesn't quite pass the smell test. (Again, my point has to do with generational characteristics and not the First Amendment -- I understand that, if Larry Flynt gets to make fun of Jerry Falwell, then we all benefit.)

And it seems that Millennial students realize that "the big thumbs down" is not a "remedy" for the potential damage to their reputations. Thus, the Pepperdine resolution. In addition, students and other critics from Loyola Marymount University have started a Facebook page to encourage the banning of JuicyCampus. This followed an anonymous threat two months ago by an anonymous poster who threatened to kill as many people on the LMU campus as possible before getting killed by the police.

Another characteristic of Millennials is that they are less tolerant of remarks that denegrate someone based on their immutable characteristics. One of the chief complaints about the gossip sites is that much of the content is racist, sexist, and homophobic. My prediction is that the Millennials' increased sensitivity to inappropriate remarks of this type will also fuel their desire to restrict the reach of "slam sites."