Skip to main content

Lexis Advance "Certification"?

Over spring break, I received an email from my school's Account Executive, as did all of my colleagues and, presumably, all of the students. This email discussed how a person could easily become "certified" on Lexis Advance over spring break, because, clearly, law school students don't have anything better to do at this time of the year. [By the way, this post should not be considered a criticism of the Account Executives; I recognize that they are just doing their jobs, which, unfortunately, includes sending out these emails. They are not responsible for the content of the email nor the linked videos.]

According to the email, the process for "certification" is easy and the rewards potentially great. To become "certified", all one has to do is watch six short videos on the LexisNexis Law Schools channel on Youtube, completing short quizzes after each one, and then ask one's Account Executive for "the link to the Lexis Advance national online Certification exam." If you pass the exam, "your name will be added to the national registry of certified students and you can note on your resume that you have attained Lexis Advance Certification." The "certification" is meant to signify to "potential employers that you are proficient in legal research."

Sounds great! With all the employers complaining that students are graduating law school without the requisite research skills, surely such "certification" would be a boost to any student's résumé, right?

As the great(?) . . . uh, famous(?) . . . well, still living Lee Corso would say: Not so fast, my friend!

Let's take a look at the first video, How to Run an Efficient Search with Lexis Advance™. What would you expect the point of this video to be? Surely, the title would suggest that this video would show us how to run an efficient search on Lexis Advance. Yet, if that is the case, why, after telling us we need to find out about lemon laws in New York, does it fail to recommend using the pre-search Jurisdiction filter to limit our search to New York? Similarly, why does it suggest choosing the words lemon law from the Word Wheel rather than entering the phrase "lemon law" (quotation marks required in Lexis Advance)? (See "Problem with Word Wheel" in Some First Thoughts on LALS (Part 3) for the significance of this distinction.)

If the intent of this video was to demonstrate efficient searching, this video failed miserably. However, if the intent was to have law students build false "confidence in [their] abilities" and to bamboozle employers into thinking that a "certified" graduate is "proficient in legal research", then LexisNexis (or at least whichever department is responsible for these videos) has succeeded with flying colors! Of course, these are just two of the many problems I have with this and the other videos.

(By the way, not to sound too petty, but what is up with LexisNexis's obsession with Lexis Advance's folders?! I mean, really! Each and every video includes a 30-second explanation of how to create folders in Lexis Advance! So, it's impossible to run an efficient search, Shepardize® a case, or perform any research in secondary sources, caselaw, statutes, or regulations without first creating a folder?! You've GOT to be kidding me!)

Considering all the changes that LexisNexis has told us are coming, these videos are completely worthless. . . . No, wait . . . Even if those changes never come, these videos are completely worthless. And considering you need to sit through these worthless videos to get "certified", at this time, "certification" on Lexis Advance must be worthless too.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Amazing, but True, Deportation Story of Carlos Marcello

Earlier this week, the University of Houston Law Center was fortunate to have as its guest Professor Daniel Kanstroom of Boston College of Law. An expert in immigration law, he is the Director of the International Human Rights Program, and he both founded and directs the Boston College Immigration and Asylum Clinic. Speaking as the guest of the Houston Journal of International Law’s annual Fall Lecture Series, Professor Kanstroom discussed issues raised in his new book, Aftermath: Deportation Law and the New American Diaspora . Professor Michael Olivas introduced Professor Kanstroom to the audience, and mentioned the fascinating tale of Carlos Marcello, which Professor Kanstroom wrote about in his chapter “The Long, Complex, and Futile Deportation Saga of Carlos Marcello,” in Immigration Stories , a collection of narratives about leading immigration law cases. My interest piqued, I read and was amazed by Kanstroom’s description of one of the most interesting figures in American le

C-SPAN Video Archive Now Online

Legislative researchers and politics fans take note. C-SPAN recently completed a digitization project placing the entirety of its video collection online. The archives record all three C-SPAN networks seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. The videos are available at no cost for historical, educational, research, and archival uses. The database includes over 160,000 hours of video recorded since 1987 and the programs are indexed by subject, speaker names, titles, affiliations, sponsors, committees, categories, formats, policy groups, keywords, and locations. The most recent, most watched, and most shared videos are highlighted on the main page. To start watching, visit the C-SPAN Video Library and use the search function at the top of the page.

Texas Subsequent History Table Ceases Publication

This week, Thomson Reuters notified subscribers that publication of the Texas Subsequent History Table will be discontinued and no further updates will be produced, due to “insufficient market interest.” Practitioners have been extracting writ (and since 1997, petition) history from the tables since their initial publication in 1917 as The Complete Texas Writs of Error Table . The tables, later published by West, have been used for nearly a century to determine how the Texas Supreme Court or Court of Criminal Appeals disposed of an appeal from an intermediate appellate court. The purpose of adding this notation to citations is to indicate the effect of the Texas Supreme Court’s action on the weight of authority of the Court of Appeals’ opinion.  For example, practitioners may prefer to use as authority a case that the Texas Supreme Court has determined is correct both in result and legal principles applied (petition refused), rather than one that simply presents no error that requires