Richard Henry Seamon and Stephen A. Spitz, University of South Carolina School of Law We propose to make a presentation on joint teaching. The presentation will be based on our experience teaching jointly, for part of one semester, in each of the past four years. Our presentation will be divided into four parts. We will discuss: (1) background; (2) objectives; (3) material and format; and (4) our students’ and our own assessments. We will make this presentation jointly. Background: Professor Spitz and I are assigned the same group of about 75 first-year law students. Professor Spitz teaches them property (a year-long, 6-credit course); I teach them constitutional law (a semester-long, 4-credit course). For about two weeks of the semester, we blend the property class with the constitutional law class. In other words, Professor Spitz and I both meet the students at the times assigned for property as well as those assigned for constitutional law. Two weeks usually comprises about 10 class sessions. During those sessions, we help students learn about the Just Compensation Clause and related issues (including the law of eminent domain). Objectives: We want to help students learn to: (a) “think across” discrete parts of the curriculum; and (b) collaborate. To explain the first objective, we remind students that, when they practice law, their clients will not tell them, “I have a property case,” or “I have a constitutional law case.” To introduce the second objective, we emphasize that the practice of law is intensively collaborative; their success as lawyers depends heavily on their ability to “play and work well with others.” By teaching them jointly, we try to model collaboration, with all of its pluses and minuses. We also have students collaborate as mock judges. Material and Format: The material includes constitutional provisions (namely the “just compensation” provisions of the U.S. and South Carolina Constitutions); statutory material (the South Carolina Eminent Domain Procedures Act); and judicial opinions (interpreting the Constitutions’ just-compensation provisions). The format includes a joint lecture (to provide a first-day overview); a Power Point presentation (on eminent domain procedures by a guest speaker); a videotaped documentary (about a controversial use of eminent domain by the City of Detroit for construction of a General Motors factory); student discussion of a related policy issue (the use of eminent domain to facilitate private economic development); fairly conventional Socratic-style examination of judicial opinions (spiced up by sometimes conflicting professorial views); and a mock oral appellate argument between the two professors before a panel of student “Supreme Court Justices,” who deliberate and announce an opinion. Student- and Self-Assessments: Each year we hand out an evaluation form for the students to fill out. We also evaluate ourselves and make adjustments as we go along. In our presentation, we will summarize the points that we believe would be most salient to professors who would consider using our approach themselves.