Download - Learning outcomes in legal education Professor Paul Maharg Glasgow Graduate School of Law
Learning outcomesin legal education
Professor Paul Maharg
Glasgow Graduate School of Law
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 2
How do you arrive at outcomes?
Lawyers and educationalists work together: what should students should be able to do, know, value, appreciate? The process:
focuses on essential knowledge, skills, attitudes, values links back, eg to LLB process and content sets expectations of student performance clarifies assessment expectations
-- William Spady (1994) Outcome-based Education: Critical Issues andAnswers, Arlington, VA, adapted
NB: Programmes of study are not essential: outcome statements are distinct from processes of learning and assessment of learning
Eg ‘By the end of [X] students should be able to …’
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 3
Eg Qualifying as a Solicitor, Annex 1…
B. Ability to complete legal transactions and resolve legal disputes, including the ability to:
• work with clients to identify their objectives, identify and evaluate themerits and risks of their options, and advise on solutions;• establish business structures and transact the sale or purchase of abusiness;• progress civil and criminal matters towards resolution using a range oftechniques and approaches;• deal with various forms of property ownership and transactions;• obtain a grant of representation and administer an estate;• draft the agreements and other documentation that will enable theseactions and transactions to be completed;• plan and implement strategies to progress cases and transactionsexpeditiously and with propriety.
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 4
Design-back is critical…
David Prideaux (2003) ABC of learning and teaching in medicine: curriculum design,
British Medical Journal, 326:268-270
David Prideaux (2003) ABC of learning and teaching in medicine: curriculum design,
British Medical Journal, 326:268-270
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 5
… across three types of curriculum …
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 6
… and three levels of urgency
must learn now
could learn now
should learn now
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 7
What improvements should outcome statements bring?
clarity as to what constitutes professionalism for lawyers, students and trainees
clearer focus on standards in skills & knowledge more structured but flexible assessments statement of a definite threshold of achievement to
be reached by trainees at any particular stage more liaison between partners, eg Law Society, LPC
providers, training organisations. firmer basis for professional accreditation later in a
practitioner’s career encourage innovation in curriculum design &
development
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 8
Disadvantages of outcomes?
being general, they give little guidance in planning interventions
objectives tend to become ‘ad hoc substitutes for hypotheses’
they give the illusion of predicting what ought to happen they imply the idea of ‘teacher-proofing’ the curriculum,
thus losing the value of ‘divergent interpretations’ they stop students having their own outcomes they inhibit speculation they have unexpected consequences for universities as
institutions, as well as teacher practice Lawrence Stenhouse, Authority, Education and Emancipation, London, Heinemann, 1983, pp 81-2, adapted
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 9
Can outcomes encompass all learning?
No – because learning … is neither a product nor a service (though it involves both) is not only a change in behaviour but a change in personal
values, attitudes, intellectual positions, cannot be accurately predicted
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 10
But outcomes can enable innovation in teaching & learning …
Eg objective structured clinical examination (OSCE): history-taking diagnosis prognosis for an example of a bioethics OSCE, see www.wings.buffalo.edu/faculty/research/bioethics/osce.html
Eg transactional learning: active learning. learning to do legal transactions. transaction + reflection. collaborative learning. holistic process learning.
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 11
… eg through outcomes-based simulations …
are close to the world of practice, but safe from the (possible) realities of malpractice.
enable students to practise legal transactions, discuss the transactions with other tutors, students, and use a variety of instruments or tools, online or textual, to help them understand the nature and consequences of their actions
encourage collaborative learning and thinking about the type of professional they want to become
students begin to see the potential for the C in ICT; and that technology is not merely a matter of word-processed essays & quizzes, but a form of learning that changes quite fundamentally what and how they learn.
facilitate a wide variety of assessment, from high-stakes assignments with automatic fail points, to coursework that can double as a learning zone and an assessment assignment
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 12
… with practical & innovative assessments
For examples of forms of assessment, see US Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education:
http://www.ahsc.arizona.edu/azmec/June%2003%20Newsletter.doc.
direct observation or shadowing standardized oral / clinical skills examinations objective standardized exams simulations and models chart-stimulated recall global rating 360 Degree Evaluation OSCE portfolios record review
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 13
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 14
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 15
So what could be affected under outcomes-based professional learning?
1. methods of teaching and learning2. materials and resources3. timetable of study, work-based practice & assessment4. subject knowledge and skills that are the focus of classes or
workshops5. pre-existing aims & objectives6. distance, open, flexible and resource-based learning methods7. staff training – in designing, teaching, facilitating, assessing8. evaluation methods aligned to professional practice9. monitoring and accreditation guidelines10. wider context of curriculum and work-based context11. communication & partnership amongst all involved parties
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 16
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 17
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 18
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 19
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 20
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 21
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 22
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 23
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 24
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 25
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 26
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 27
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 28
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 29
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 30
Transactional learning:Private Client project
General outline: Students wind up the estate of a deceased client who dies intestate,
via 4 assignments. Students drafted: Initial Writ Estate Valuation Correspondence Forms C1, IHT 200 & supplements a will
Resources: no lectures, no exams: instead, tutorials and coursework 50 scenarios virtual collection of the client’s estate online assessment & submission of assignments FAQ online tutor assessment on average, six outcomes per assessment
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 32
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 33
Look again at Qualifying as a Solicitor, Annex 1…
B. Ability to complete legal transactions and resolve legal disputes, including the ability to:
• work with clients to identify their objectives, identify and evaluate themerits and risks of their options, and advise on solutions;• establish business structures and transact the sale or purchase of abusiness;• progress civil and criminal matters towards resolution using a range oftechniques and approaches;• deal with various forms of property ownership and transactions;• obtain a grant of representation and administer an estate;• draft the agreements and other documentation that will enable theseactions and transactions to be completed;• plan and implement strategies to progress cases and transactionsexpeditiously and with propriety.
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 34
Can portfolio learning be a key assessment of outcomes?
Yes, if it’s a sophisticated & complex learning tool – for example an e-portfolio, which:
is a continuation of undergraduate PDP through to CPD is wholly electronic and wholly embedded in simulation learning
activities and actual legal practice contains annotated text and video, graphics, animation, etc draws information from personal, academic and CPD domains evidences transactional learning and reflection has assessment zones, personal zones, confidential zones is wholly the responsibility of the learner-manager, under detailed
professional guidelines is in part under supervision by tutors, supervisors, Law Society
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 35
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 36
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 37
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 38
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 39
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 40
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 41
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 42
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 43
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 44
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 45
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 46
Standing Conference on Legal Education, November, 2005 47
contact details
Professor Paul Maharg
T: 44 00 (0)141 548 4946E: [email protected]: http://zeugma.typepad.com
Glasgow Graduate School of LawLord Hope BuildingUniversity of Strathclyde141 St James’ RoadGlasgow G4 0LU