Summer 1999 – Issue 55 - Stanford Lawyer - Stanford University

from page 11pedagogy, such as "situational" case studiesand collaborative learning. Many ofthese efforts are subsumed in the newInitiative in Law, Business, and PublicPolicy.These and all other curricular developmentsultimately flow from onesource-thevital strength ofthe Schoolthefaculty. My proudest legacy is a facultythat is the envy oflegal academia. Inaddition to their excellence in scholarshipand commitment to professional education,our faculty is diverse in every dimension-rangingfrom disciplinary approachesto gender, race, and sexualorientation. Itis a faculty that gets alongwell with each other and with the students.My pride in these achievements istempered by two observations. First,though Stanford has the most racially diversefaculty ofany peer law school in thecountry, I am disappointed that, despitesincere efforts, we have not increased thefaculty's racial diversity during my deanship.I know that Kathleen Sullivan willredouble our efforts in this regard.Second, to be realistically modest, there'sa huge amount ofchance in recruiting andretaining the very best faculty in the country,especially when they are constantlybeing courted by other institutions.But we would not have even had thechance-we would not have been at thetable-butfor the supportofthe School'salumni and friends. It was a fiscal crisisin 1991 that led me to begin my fall letter:"Your law school is in peril." Whilesome thought this hyperbolic, it was aplain fact that Stanford's faculty compensationhad become dangerously subcompetitivewith peer schools and that wewere losing faculty to those schools.We initially attributed the School'sfinancial troubles to a combination oftheLorna Prieta earthquake, the University'sindirect costs problems, the recession ofthe early 1990s, and the rising cost ofPeninsula real estate. But we soon understoodthat these events merely exacerbateda problem ofmuch longer standing:Stanford alumni were not supportingtheir law school in the same numbers andat the same levels as the graduates ofpeerschools. And the fault was ours: We hadnot stayed in close contact with alumni.We had not engaged them in the School'smission. And we had not worked to developa strong tradition ofgiving.There has been a sea change.Starting with the Board ofVisitors' 2010Task Force and the Dean's AdvisoryCouncil that planned the Campaign forStanford Law School, and continuingwith many regional advisory meetingson the School's programs, we have developeda uniquely productive, consul-tative mode ofinteraction. In addition togaining needed financial support, thishas contributed to curricular improvementsand to valuable networks amongalumni, faculty, and students. Deans andfaculty will come and go, but with continuednurture, Stanford Law School'sextended community will only grow instrength. Many of us have worked togetherto bring this about, and we canshare great pride in this achievement.Until recently, I had every intentionof returning to the full-time faculty.Then along came an opportunity thatI found irresistible: the presidency oftheWilliam and Flora Hewlett Foundation.What can a recovering dean contributeto one of the nation's largest foundations?As I almost told a brash student reporterwho asked this question: Considerthe contribution that a retired safecrackercould make as a bank's security guard. Inany event, it will be interesting to see theworld from the other side of the table.When I accepted the position,Gerhard Casper commented that Iris andI would never again know who our realfriends were. That may be true goingforward-I certainly have gained quite afew new acquaintances in the last month.But in 30 years at Stanford and 12 yearsas dean, we have made many friends inthe University and its extended family,and we greatly look forward to sustainingand nurturing these friendships inthe years to come. _f"0111 page 67Henry T. Greely, "Bragdon v. Abbott, TheAmericans with Disabilities Act, and HIVInfection," Letter to the Editor, New EnglandJmlrnalofhteduine,April 15, 1999,p. 1213.HenryT. Greely, "Genetic Testing for Cancers:The Surgeons' Critical Role," remarks, Journal ofthe American College ofSurgeons, January 1999, p.86.Henry T. Greely, "Genomics Research andHuman Subjects," editorial, Science, October 23,1998, p. 625.Henry T. Greely, "The Human Side ofGenomics Research," The Stanford Repo1't, p.16March 17, 1999, p. 16.Henry T. Greely, "The Regulation of PrivateHealth Insurance," in Health Care Corporate Law(1998 supplement), Mark Hall, ed. Boston: Little,Brown, 1998.Miguel A. Mendez, "The Town Hall Meeting:One Perspective: A Word from Professor MiguelMendez," Stanford Public Interest Newsletter,February 16,1999, p. 2.Deborah L. Rhode, "Danger or Delight? IsRomance at Work All Bad?," National LawJournal,November 23, 1998, p. AZI.DeborahL. Rhode, "Re-Reform Welfare Laws,"National Law Journal, May 10, 1999, p. AZ6.Deborah L. Rhode, "Sex Harassment Remains aProblem in Schools," National LawJ(lllrnal, October5,1998, p. AZS.Deborah L. Rhode, "Solomon Amendments CurbAcademic Freedom," National Law Journal,February 1, 1999, p. AZI.KathleenM. SuIlivan, "1999 Resolved: The Law:Put Politics Back Where It Belongs," WashingtonPost, January 3,1999, p. C4.Kathleen M. SuIlvian, "Madison Got it Backward,"New York Times, February 16, 1999, p. A19.This bibliography was compiled by Erika Wayne,reference and Internet services librarian,Robert Crown Law Library. Continuouslyupdated, it is available online athttp://www.stanford.edu/groupllaw/libnry/wbatl1awbib.htm~ SLIMMER 1999