The following discussion is intended to serve as an introduction to conflict theory as a course of instruction at a law school, addressing some fundamental considerations and providing some thoughts on how they may be handled.

1. What is conflict theory?
Conflict Theory refers generally to those theories that seek a greater understanding of the source and nature of conflict; how and why it escalates, de-escalates, or persists; and the conditions under which it can be constructive or destructive. It is related to conflict resolution, and conflict resolution theory, but is different in that it focuses on the nature, structure, and implications of conflict before resolution strategies are considered rather than focusing primarily on how the conflict might be resolved.

By its nature, Conflict Theory is an interdisciplinary course of study, drawing substantially on scholarly literatures other than law, including psychology, sociology, anthropology, and economics, among others. Depending upon such factors as instructor preference, and size of class, it can also include a clinical component to help round out the theoretical study with applied experiential learning.

2. Why teach conflict theory in a law school?
In the main, Conflict Theory is a perspectives course, which, like jurisprudence, legal history, and critical legal studies, broadens the student's understanding of the law, and lawyering, beyond mere doctrine and application.

In particular, Conflict Theory can help law students achieve greater empathy for their clients, and provide deeper insights into what processes and remedies might be most effective in addressing the client's needs and interests. It can also enhance the students' own emotional intelligence by providing a deeper understanding of how they relate to conflict, both as individuals and as lawyers. Finally, Conflict Theory can give law students a fuller perspective of their place as lawyers in society, and how they may serve that role more constructively.

In this way, Conflict Theory supports, and is supported by, more traditional dispute resolution courses, including client counseling, negotiation, mediation, the dispute resolution survey course, systems design, as well as preventive and therapeutic law.

3. How can Conflict Theory be integrated into the law school environment?
At least two models are possible: Integration into other courses, and a stand-alone course.

A. The Integrative Approach: Students may be introduced to conflict theory in the early portions of most traditional dispute resolution courses with a discussion about theories about the nature of conflict (individual characteristics, social process, social structure, identity theories), the meaning of escalation (expansion in parties, issues, intensity of tactics, etc.), and the implications for the rest of the course (whatever the course may be).

B. Stand-alone model. A 2-3 unit stand-alone course or seminar provides a vehicle for a much richer treatment, of course. You may want to consider having the class meet one day a week rather than two or three, to allow for more time to integrate theory and demonstrative activities such as role plays, exercises, etc. For examples of syllabi, see www.aals.org/am2003/workshop.html.

4. What is the scope of the Conflict Theory Course?
In structuring the Conflict Theory course, hard choices on will have to be made, but do allow one to shape the course according to instructor preferences. A few dimensions are:

A. Types of conflict. The question here is whether to focus on interpersonal conflict, or to expand to group conflict, social conflict, or, even more broadly, international conflict. A substantial conflict theory course can be structured around any or all of these possibilities.

B. Interdisciplinary breadth. How many different disciplinary perspectives can the class (and instructor!) adequately manage? For example, game theory has made, and continues to make, important contributions to our understanding of conflict, but students often have difficulty getting beyond the most basic considerations of game theory.

5. What role plays, exercises, and other teaching tools are available?
Role plays and exercises are particularly challenging because most such materials in the dispute resolution field are directed at helping students work with various methods of conflict resolution, such as negotiation and mediation, rather than identifying, experiencing, and managing the dynamics of the conflict itself. That said, some of the role plays and exercises that are commonly used in negotiation and other dispute resolution courses can be used in a conflict theory course, such as the prisoner's dilemma games (Oil Pricing, Win As Much as You Can), and the Management of Differences Exercise (Thomas-Kilman).

One technique for creating some value out of this problem is to structure a writing component into the course, and to have students work, either alone or in teams, at developing role plays that will bring out two or three specific aspects of conflict theory (with teaching notes!). Some can be quite good, and usable in later classes.

Two other teaching tools are worth noting. First, movies can be particularly helpful in bringing conflict theory down to Earth. The Cuban Missile Crisis, and its more modern incarnation, Thirteen Days, for example, provides a vehicle for analyzing most if not all issues that would be covered in a Conflict Theory course.

Second, mindfulness meditation can also be used as a teaching tool. Len Riskin, for example, has pioneered this innovation in his Understanding Conflict course, which is required for the Missouri LL.M. in Dispute Resolution. He uses it primarily as a vehicle to help students who wish to participate in this part of the course understand how the mind relates to conflict, and how perceptions of self and other contribute to the development and potential resolution of conflict.¹

6. Interdisciplinary opportunities.
Because of the potential breadth of the topic, a conflict theory course readily lends itself to guest lecturers from other disciplines who can extend these principles to areas of particular curricular, student, or scholarly interest. One might draw upon a colleague in the psychology department to address group or attribution theory, for example, or upon a journalism professor to address the media's impact on social conflict, or upon a business professor to discuss implications of conflict theory for organizational management and change.

7. Evaluating students.
The method for evaluating students can vary depending upon the size of course, teaching objectives, whether a clinical component is included, and other traditional considerations. The course readily lends itself to a traditional law school examination, which can be helpful for large classes. Similarly, Conflict Theory also lends itself to the use of reflective papers, particularly those that compel the students to apply conflict theory principles to their personal lives and experiences.

Finally, the nature of the material also lends itself to student research papers, giving students the opportunity to more deeply explore topics of interest, such as the relation of gender or power to conflict and escalation, or integrating trust analysis into systems evaluation. One word of caution here, though: While it is often not difficult for students to identify topics of interest, the research itself can be more difficult for them (particularly during a 14-week semester) because it requires research in areas other than those covered by such traditional vehicles as cases and law review articles.

8. Resources (books we use or draw upon to teach the course).

• Barbara Benedict Bunker, Jeffrey Z. Rubin & Associates, Conflict, Cooperation & Justice: Essays Inspired by the Work of Morton Deutsch (1995)
• Pat K. Chew, The Conflict and Culture Reader (2001)
• Morton Deutsch and Peter Coleman, The Conflict Resolution Handbook (2000)
• Kenneth Cloke, Resolving Personal and Organizational Conflict: Stories of Transformation and Forgiveness (2000)
• Steven Keeva, Transforming Practices: Bringing Joy and Satisfaction into the Legal Life (1999)
• Louis Kreisberg, Constructive Conflicts: From Escalation to Resolution (1998)
• Bernard S. Mayer, The Dynamics of Conflict Resolution (2000)
• Doug Stone et al, Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss What Matters Most (1999)
• Jeffrey Z. Rubin, Dean G. Pruitt, and Sung Hee Kim, Social Conflict: Escalation, Stalemate and Settlement (2nd ed. 1994)
• James A. Schellenberg, Conflict Resolution: Theory, Research, and Practice (1996)
• Vamik Volkan, Blood Lines: From Ethnic Pride to Ethnic Terrorism (1997)

9. People to Contact for Help:

Roberta M. Ackerman. Penn State - Dickinson School of Law, 150 South College Street Carlisle, PA 17013. Phone: 717-241-3535. Fax: 717-240-5126. E-mail: bxa9@psu.edu.

Kenneth H. Fox. Hamline University School of Law. 1536 Hewitt Ave., St. Paul, MN 55103. Phone: 651-523-2411. Fax: 651-523-2236 (fax). E-mail: kenfox@hamline.edu.

Julie Macfarlane. University of Windsor Faculty of Law, 401 Sunset AvenueWindsor, ON N9B 3P4, Canada. Phone: 519-253-3000 ext. 2962. Fax: 519-973-7064. E-mail: juliem@uwindsor.ca

Richard C. Reuben. University of Missouri-Columbia School of Law, Columbia, Hulston Hall, Columbia, Missouri, 65211. Phone: 573-884-5204. Fax: 573-882-3343. E-Mail: ReubenR@Missouri.edu.

Leonard L. Riskin. University of Missouri-Columbia School of Law, Columbia, Hulston Hall, Columbia, Missouri, 65211. Phone: 573-882-8084. Fax: 573-882-3343. E-Mail: RiskinL@Missouri.edu.

Richard Birke. Willamette University College of Law. 245 Winter Street S.E., Salem, Oregon 97301 Phone: 503-375-5388. Fax: (503) 370-6375. E-mail: rbirke@willamette.edu.