1. The document discusses the concept of a "permeable web" in legal education, where boundaries between different representations and spaces overlap. It argues for a focus on experiential and transactional learning.
2. It provides examples of simulations and assessments used in different law programs to incorporate professionalism and ethics learning. Key aspects include developing trust and collaboration between students.
3. New frameworks for Scottish legal education aim to put professionalism at the core through collaborative curriculum development and use of simulations.
The permeable web: community, value and ethics in legal education
1. T he permeable web: community, value and ethics in legal education Professor Paul Maharg Glasgow Graduate School of Law
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11. professionalism Outcome Positive indicator Negative indicator 5. Personal integrity and civility towards colleagues, clients and the courts Is honest with all others on the course; relates to colleagues on the programme with civility; treats tutors, administrative staff and others with respect. Exhibits traits of arrogance, intemperate behaviour, mismanagement of own affairs; lies to colleagues or programme personnel; plagiarises work; adopts the work of others as own work; is abusive or contemptuous towards colleagues or programme personnel.
12.
13.
14.
15. large-scale implementation in disciplines Discipline Degree programme Institution Architecture BSc (Hons) / March, year 3 Strathclyde U. (1) Management Science BA (Hons), year 1 Strathclyde U. (1) Social Work MA (Hons), year 2/3 Strathclyde U. (1) Law LLB, year 1 Glamorgan U. (1) Law LLB, year 2/3 Stirling U. (2) Law LLB, year 3 Warwick U. (1) Law LLB, year 3 West of England U. (1) Law Diploma in Legal Practice, p/g Strathclyde U. (6)
27. t ools for learning professionalism: the learning/trust matrix Trust Dysfunctional Learning Community Friendly Society Legal Eagles Learning Barton & Westwood, 2006
30. low trust and low learning “ not my place to act as social worker to my team members.” “ Teamwork jarring is insoluble – some people are just destined not to work together.” “ Basically I would say that our firm was a success although we would have been better as a group of three.” “… this was done for selfish reasons as at the time I had no desire to work with L as tensions between us from the outset were high” “… childlike tantrums…turned into a nightmare” Trust Learning Barton & Westwood, 2006
31.
32.
33. high trust and high learning “ the great thing about the firm was that I felt that we all picked up on these weaknesses early on without any conflicts arising” “ that doesn’t mean our differences have to separate us…that is precisely what makes us work much better together as a team” “ Greater than the sum of the parts springs to mind.” “ People were flexible about the work they took on and were willing to try new things.” “… responsibility was shared and that support would be given if someone had a problem.” “ The other 2 members of the firm turned up on the negotiation day to lend moral support and share in the outcome” Learning Trust
46. Harvard Law School online course… http://blogs. law.harvard.edu /cyberone/
47.
48.
49.
50. John Dewey E.L. Thorndike 1. Philosopher & educationalist Educational psychologist 2. Theoretician and practical implementer Theoretician & experimentalist 3. Interested in the arc between experience & the world Explored the dyadic relationship between mind & the world 4. Pragmatist approach to learning: prior experience, ways of contextual knowing Adopted as precursor of a behaviourist approach to learning: assessment-led; laws of effect, recency, repetition 5. Emphasised learning ecologies Emphasised teaching strategies 6. Followed by: Bruner, Kilpatrick, standards movement, Constructivist tradition Followed by: Watson, Skinner, Gagné, outcomes movement,
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
Hinweis der Redaktion
Transactional learning is active learning, not passive. In that sense, we want students to be involved in activities within legal actions, rather than standing back from the actions and merely learning about them. transactional learning goes beyond learning about legal actions to learning from legal actions we aim to give them experience of legal transactions. Transactional learning involves thinking about transactions. It includes the ability to rise above detail, and "helicopter" above a transaction; or the ability to disengage oneself from potentially damaging views of the group process, and re-construct that view Students are valuable resources for each other. Collaborative learning breaks down the isolation and alienation of what might be regarded as isolated or cellular learning. There is of course a place for individual learning, silent study, and the like. But students can help each other enormously to understand legal concepts and procedures by discussing issues, reviewing actions in a group, giving peer feedback on work undertaken in the group, and so on. And perhaps what is even more important is that they begin to trust each other to carry out work that is important. In other words, students begin to learn how to leverage knowledge amongst themselves, and to trust each other’s developing professionality (learning about know-who, know-why, as well as know-what within the firm). Often, we have found, if there are firms that are not producing good work or keeping to deadlines, it is because they do not know how to work together effectively; and this often arises from a lack of trust. Transactional learning ought to be based on a more holistic approach. Allowing students to experience the whole transaction- and all the different parts- not just the actual procedure but how this may affect the client and how you may have to report this to the client. Transactional learning of necessity draws upon ethical learning and professional standards. There are many examples of how students have had to face ethical situations within the environment – some are ones where we have created a situation with an ethical issue- others have arisen unexpectedly. E.g mandate example ( if time) 7 & 8: Students are taking part in a sophisticated process that involves taking on the role of a professional lawyer within the confines of the virtual town and firm. In order to enhance the learning experience they must be immersed in the role play- and to do that they must be undertaking authentic tasks. Research suggests that when students are involved with online environment similar to the virtual village- that these authentic settings have the capability to motivate and encourage learner participation by facilitating students ‘willing suspension of disbelief’. This allows them to become immersed in the setting.
The project aimed to address the educational and management issues of implementing an environment such as the one we have just demonstrated to you. These have been identified elsewhere in this presentation and are brought together this slide. Personalized and collaborative learning, how you use a simulation project and how this relates to other modes of learning, use of rich media and finally the matter of creating an authentic environment with authentic tasks.
So what are we doing in the project: We are creating- indeed have created – tools which allow academics to build simulations similar to the one you’ve seen here. These can be highly structured, closed boundary simulations as well as loosely-structured, open-field simulations We’re developing guidelines for academics, support staff, IT staff and students. There is a tool for the creation of the map and directory and communication tools. We are mentoring a number of partner projects and also evaluating the experience for future users.
Major personality clashes from outset Polarisation; warring factions Resistance to change; inability to adapt Me first; firm nowhere Fixed attitudes; no self awareness Blame culture; victimisation Relationship focussed: ‘them’ (differences) No confidence in other members Independence: lose-lose
Recognition of strengths and weaknesses Mutually supportive & sense of personal value Inclusive culture; decisions by consensus Good communications; self diagnostic Shared responsibility & respect Flexible, organic development of working practices Ability to learn from mistakes: adaptable, resilient Ground rules: everyone ‘plays fair’ Interdependence: win-win Task focussed: ‘our way’