Working the nexus and drawing pictures

Two new articles from the Legal Education Review may be of interest.

Working the Nexus: Teaching Students to Think, Read and Problem-solve Like a Lawyer
(by Kate Galloway, Mary Heath, Alex Steel, Anne Hewitt and Natalie Skead) draws on our Smart Casual experiences and considers the way in which students need to learn to read, think and write simultaneously.  The paper explores how each is a both a separate and linked skill and the way teachers move between explicit and implicit reference to these skills in teaching. It argues that no one skill alone amounts to “thinking like a lawyer”, and that although the skills are often presented as lineal processes, for the student it is deeply iterative.

Where are the Graphics? Communicating Legal Ideas Effectively Using Images and Symbols (by Tania Leiman) looks at the history and current use of visual images to describe the law.  Tania provides an rich and fascinating set of examples of how lawyers use visual aids and visual thinking internationally and in Australia.  She finishes with a set of issues for legal education to ponder.  In a similar vein to the increasing concerns about coding and law school, Tania suggests we can’t teach students to be designers, but we can teach them to think in ways that enable them to both create and critique visual summaries of the law.  As she points out, her article contains no graphics, underlining the difficulty of converting complex arguments to accurate visual guides.

Legal Writing Resources

Chantal Morton from the University of Melbourne has put together this very helpful list of resources for legal writing.  Many thanks Chantal!

  1. Professor Ellen Zweibel and Virginia McRae at the University of Ottawa Faculty of Law (Canada) have led the design of a great website with modules on how to write legal memos and edit your own work: http://pointfirstwriting.com/.  They are in the process of designing two more modules.  The resources are fantastic – and why reinvent the wheel?  I have been pointing my students to the resource ever since I heard about it at the Legal Writing Institute conference in Portland.
  2. I am in the midst of turning the 2015 Legal Writing symposium website into a blog with broader reach with respect to skills for law (https://skillsforlaw.wordpress.com/ ).  If you have any resources, articles, or websites you would like to see featured, please send me an email.  At the moment, we are storing some teaching modules from Charles Calleros.  I love using his exercise Rules for Lina (slightly modified for an Australian audience – feel free to contact me if you’d like the modified script and tips for having students role play Lina and her parent).  The videos will be posted in the new year.
  3. I just received my ‘holiday reading’ and thought I’d mention two Australian resources: a second edition of Nichola Corbett-Jarvis and Brendan Grigg, Effective Legal Writing: A Practical Guide (LexisNexis, 2nd ed, 2017) and the new book by Kenneth Yin and Anibeth Desierto, Legal Problem Solving and Syllogistic Analysis (LexisNexis, 2016).
  4. I am just back from a two-week stint at Stetson University College of Law (Florida).  Professor Kirsten Davis has put together a new project called Teaching Legal Writing: Out of the Box Ideas (http://www.stetson.edu/law/academics/lrw/teaching-legal-writing.php?ad=20160702).  You can email her directly for your free ‘box’ (kkdavis@law.stetson.edu) – I have already developed one of the activities for a workshop I am running for my JD and masters students in 2017.
  5. The Legal Writing Institute is primarily USA-based but the (free!) membership includes legal research and writing faculty from Australia, Canada and the UK (etc).  They publish some really interesting (and helpful) articles through the Legal Writing Journal and The Second Draft (I just happen to be one of the editors of the latter).  They also have something called The Idea Bank where legal research and writing teachers will post modules for others to adapt and use.  You can get access to it for free – just post one of your own modules (although if you are not ready to share, they’ll let you poke around without a contribution): http://www.lwionline.org/
  6. The LWI conference takes place every other year – so the next big one is in 2018.  In 2017, there are two related conferences you might want to consider: a) the Association of Legal Writing Directors has a few opportunities for professional development listed here http://www.alwd.org/events/ and b) the next Global Legal Skills Conference (easily the best conferences I have ever been to) takes place in March, 2017, in Mexico.  Details here: http://glsc.jmls.edu/2017/ (although keep in mind I am hoping to get them to come to Australia in 2018 so if you can’t make the trip to Mexico, keep a watch on the announcements for 2018!)

New Wellbeing and Mental Health Guide for lawyers

Colin James

A new Guide on wellbeing and mental health for lawyers has just been released by lawyers and researchers associated with the Wellness Network for Law. It was produced as a collaboration between the NSW Law Society, NSW Young Lawyers and four staff at ANU Legal Workshop.  The chapters were primarily written by Stephen Tang, Margie Rowe, Tony Foley, Vivien Holmes and Colin James.  There are also contributions from Ian Hickie and profiles from other familiar Wellness Network names, including Michelle Sharpe and Mary Digiglio.

 

The Guide is free and can be viewed online, downloaded as a PDF, and be ordered as hard copies:

 

http://lawsociety.com.au/ForSolictors/professionalsupport/supportingyou/BeingWellintheLaw/index.htm

 

The authors provide a more optimistic and comprehensive approach to wellbeing and mental health beyond identifying high levels of distress.  It has a chapter specifically for new lawyers on ‘starting right’ but the rest of the Guide is useful for all lawyers, and also for law students. It addresses wellbeing, mental health, thriving, values/ethics and their relationship with wellbeing and the differing types of stress (there is good stress!) and how to deal with it.

New manual on ethics issues for learning and teaching research

A comprehensive manual on how to navigate ethical issues in learning and teaching research has just been released.  It provides very helpful guidance on how to develop ethics applications and how to avoid some of the ethics traps of action research in learning and teaching.   Innovations in teaching are often seen by teachers as just internal tinkering or improvements, but if the teacher is interested in an objective way to measure their success, the innovation is probably best seen as form of research into teaching practice.  Having ethics clearance from the start means successes can be publicised and justified to others.

Following is an overview by Mark Israel, one of the authors.

In 2014 the Australian Government Office of Learning and Teaching (OLT) commissioned AHRECS to undertake work to help OLT grant-holders and fellows avoid unnecessary difficulties and delays during research ethics review.

AHRECS identified several factors contributed to these problems, including:

  1. the inexperience of some Scholarship of Teaching and Learning researchers in approaching human research and human research ethics review;
  2. the unfamiliarity of some research ethics reviewers with standard practices in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning; and
  3. the absence of resources relating to the ethical design and review of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning research.

AHRECS produced a resource manual to support the ethical decision making of SoTL researchers and reviewers. The AHRECS SoTL Manual consists of six booklets that include academic references, recommended reading and prompts for ethical reflections. The booklets are practically focused and include example problems/suggested strategies.

The Manual is available from the OLT web site, and a copy is hosted on the AHRECS site:

Booklet 01 SoTL Manual: Research ethics and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

Booklet 02 SoTL Manual: Ethics review and grant or fellowship funded research

Booklet 03 SoTL Manual: Risks and benefits in SoTL research

Booklet 04 SoTL Manual: Recruitment and consent in SoTL research

Booklet 05 SoTL Manual: Privacy and confidentiality in SoTL funded research

Booklet 06 SoTL Manual: Ethical challenges and practical strategies

Allen, G, Israel, M and Thomson, C (2016) Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Human Research Ethics Resource Manual. Sydney: Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching.
http://www.ahrecs.com/?post_type=resource&p=1696

Please direct any questions about the SoTL Manual to Dr Gary Allen (gary.allen@ahrecs.com) or Prof. Mark Israel (mark.israel@ahrecs.com). You can find out more about the work of AHRECS at www.ahrecs.com.

Figuring out what works in Legal Education – the gaps in research and why it’s not all gloom and doom

By Julian Laurens and Lucas Lixinski

An article published in today’s The Conversation suggests there is a sizeable problem in the higher education literature, in that it is not sufficiently comprehensive, too anecdotally-based, and because of that lacks replication / transplantation value, making it difficult for other educators to apply findings in their own contexts. That is a fair point, even if focusing only on legal education helps address some of the article’s concerns.

One of the things some of us are trying to do at UNSW Law attempts to rise to some of these challenges. By seeking to clearly situate our teaching practice within the literature of what we do know, we are developing a body of work that addresses some of those gaps, with the caveat that it is in the legal education context, and may not be easily applicable outside the Common Law (or even Australian!) context. Which leads us to question whether there is such a thing as generalizable formulae in education. To be sure, in assuming the jurisdiction-specific nature of education, we may be tying ourselves to the notion that legal education primarily teaches content, rather than transferrable skills. But even if we are talking about skills, they are still historically, politically and socially contingent, so transplantability of findings about “what works” can never really be complete. So, not only may be the objective of a generalized wisdom on higher education be a utopia, there is also reason to believe that we do have generally a pretty good idea of some things that do actually work, at least in law (though admittedly there are glaring gaps in the Legal Education literature).

Part of the issue is how one can measure things like ‘success’ – whether it is a narrow, easily quantifiable neo-liberal inspired marker (test scores come to mind), or something broader, encompassing notions of justice (such as student well-being). An example is the difference between the education system in Norway and how they approach student learning and the education system in say the United States with its completely discredited emphasis on continual standardised testing and so forth.

So, yes, we DO know that some things work better than others and we DO have an idea of how they are situated very clearly in the relevant psychological and educational literature. And there is no reason to assume that many things cannot be transferred into University teaching that were found in, say, a secondary school setting. We need to bear in mind the contingencies that define the legal field (and, for that matter, any field of knowledge), but we think there is more reason to hope than to despair. The problem may be that we have people with MBAs designing educational policy, instead of people with MEd’s.

Student engagement in university decision-making and governance- towards a more inclusive student voice

An OLT Strategic Priority Commissioned Project led by Sally Varnham UTS

by Sally Varnham and Bronwyn Olliffe

The “student voice” project was born out of experience with student engagement in university governance bodies and a recognition that in a changing tertiary education environment students expect a greater say in how they experience tertiary education.

As this study unfolded it became apparent that there is a wealth of experience with student engagement and partnership in other countries that we can draw on. At the same time, we have seen that some Australian tertiary education institutions are already implementing similar practices with their own student cohorts.

A challenge in embedding good student engagement practice here in Australia arises from the different types of institution providing tertiary education. A one size fits all approach will not suffice.  However, whatever the specific needs and constraints of particular institutions, we believe that there are lessons to be learnt from international experience and our collective Australian experiences in engaging students in decision-making.

To encourage engagement, a sincere culture of partnership must be developed through demonstration by universities and the sector of a commitment to and respect for student voice.   Communication is central: first, of the representative opportunities across the institution and secondly, how the views of student representatives are integral to decisions made. Essential components are:

  1. Effective, valued and supported student leadership in partnership with universities.
  2. A developmental approach to student representation from course/ subject level through to high level institutional bodies.
  3. Resources for training and support of student representatives.
  4. Formal and informal processes for the engagement of students at all levels for continual enhancement of courses, their university experience and their personal development.
  5. Capturing every student’s voice – engaging underrepresented student groups to ensure engagement of the whole student cohort.
  6. Appropriate financial and nonfinancial support and incentives for student representation.

The Project recommends a sector-wide collaboration for the sharing of knowledge and experience of the benefits and challenges of effective student engagement for the diverse Australian sector, ultimately working towards framing a set of principles. An Australian Learning and Teaching National Senior Teaching Fellowship has been awarded to the Project leader, Professor Sally Varnham (2016/2017) during which she will engage senior university leaders and government policy-makers, student representatives, professional and academic staff, university management, and government agencies in a sector wide discussion aiming at a shared understanding.

You can join us in continuing the Student Voice Conversation via our Facebook page: Student Voice in university decision-making and follow our activities via our web page: studentvoice.uts.edu.au.

 

Can teaching be measured? #2

Carolyn Penfold

Following on from Justine Rogers’ 30th May post: ‘Can Teaching Be Measured’ I’m adding links to some articles on the topic. I think these questions are becoming increasingly important as universities seek ‘metrics’ by which to measure their work forces. The articles linked to below suggest that bias is a concern in teaching evaluations, which for me raises the question of whether those using the metrics will need to ‘correct’ for likely (or even just potential) bias. Check these out and let me know what you think:

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/01/11/new-analysis-offers-more-evidence-against-student-evaluations-teaching

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2016/02/04/student-evaluations-of-teaching-gender-bias/

https://tcf.org/content/commentary/student-evaluations-skewed-women-minority-professors/

http://www.utstat.toronto.edu/reid/sta2201s/gender-teaching.pdf