ILNews

New partnership sends McKinney faculty and students back to high school

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

They arrived on yellow school buses as visitors Wednesday afternoon but someday the high school students may come as law students.

The Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law and Shortridge Magnet High School for Law and Public Policy in Indianapolis inked a partnership that will put McKinney faculty and students in Shortridge classrooms and bring Shortridge students to McKinney.

Dean Gary Roberts said he was “very proud of and very excited about” the new program which helps the law school fulfill its mission of service to the state of Indiana and the community.

Talking to the Shortridge students, Roberts said, “We’re hoping to get you excited about the law and about a career in the legal profession.”

Since Shortridge started the school year in August, McKinney faculty have been team-teaching law classes covering a range of topics from contracts and the U.S. Constitution to election and health care.

In addition, McKinney students will serve as tutors and mentors, helping and encouraging their young friends. Three McKinney students will take on the task of developing and coaching a mock trial team at Shortridge, something the school currently does not have.

Finally, students who excel at Shortridge may shadow McKinney students working in the legal clinic, giving the high school students an opportunity to see and experience what the practice of law and courtrooms are really like.

“My hope is we will help make Shortridge one of the top schools in Indiana,” said Carlton Waterhouse, associate professor of law and one of the driving forces behind the partnership.
 

The McKinney School of Law hosted a ceremony Wednesday to sign a memorandum of understanding and officially launch the collaboration. Eugene White, superintendent of Indianapolis Public Schools and Marion Superior Judge and Shortridge alumnus Grant Hawkins were among the speakers. White was introduced by Justina Fields, Shortridge senior and summer intern at Lewis Wagner LLP, while Hawkins was introduced by Markell Pipkins, who told the gathering he wants to be a prosecutor.

“I hope our students realize how blessed they are and how unique they are and, hopefully, they will repay (the law school) by doing their very best,” White said.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  2. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  3. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  4. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  5. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

ADVERTISEMENT