Legal Commentary

Hastings has what I take to be an antiquated regulation about co-authorship in its tenure standards:

"Co-authored works will be considered to the extent that the candidate's contribution can be separately evaluated."

I can only guess that this kind of thinking came out of an age where casebook authors assigned one another separate chapters that could be sent out for review individually.  But this regulation is clearly out of date, in my humble opinion.  Thankfully, we're about to revisit the issue and I would be very curious about what modern standards look like on the question of co-authorship.  And if you were writing tenure standards anew, how would you  handle the issue?