Nelson, J --- "In This Issue" [2004] LegEdDig 17; (2004) 12(4) Legal Education Digest 2

In This Issue

Dr John Nelson

[2004] LegEdDig 17; (2004) 12(4) Legal Education Digest 2

Most of the fifteen articles digested for this quarterly issue were published in recent editions of the American Journal of Legal Education and the British journal, The Law Teacher. Unfortunately, on this occasion there is no review article, as we were unable to identify and obtain in time for review any recent books or monographs on important themes concerning legal education, which we considered should be drawn to the attention of our readers. However, it is confidently anticipated that there will be at least one and possibly two publications which will be the subject of review articles in the forthcoming July issue of the Digest.

There are two articles under Assessment. Burton looks at how the development of student teamwork skills was assessed in an Australian law school by focusing on the process of working in the team, rather than the product of the team. Marson & Van Hoorebeek discuss the benefits of electronic assignment submission for both the law school and for students and, after conducting a student survey, conclude that, in principle, students would welcome the choice and flexibility that paperless submission would provide.

Under Research there are two articles which encourage law schools to build up an infrastructure for empirical research. Epstein & King argue that legal scholars should form a sub-field of scholarship devoted to solving the methodological problems unique to the discipline’s data and theoretical questions. They recommend that law schools should incorporate into their curriculum at least one course on empirical research covering both qualitative and quantitative approaches. Spitzer, as a law school dean, examines the practical implications of following the suggestions that have been made for improving the empirical scholarship produced by law teachers and the empirical skills of law school graduates.

Two different but related legal skills are dealt with in the two articles under Skills. Israel, Handsley & Davis report on the outcomes from a collaborative learning project in Constitutional Law and conclude that properly researched and monitored programs can help create an environment for staff and students within which group work and collaborative learning might productively occur. After researching problem-based student learning, Liddle concludes that both surface and deep learners employ four qualitatively different problem solving strategies when verbally working through a legal problem.

There are also two articles under Teaching Methods & Media. In a paper on computer assisted learning, Hanlon surveys the impact of electronic delivery of law modules on actual student assessment performance and shares some of his experiences in the delivery of two undergraduate law modules in this way. Buchanan & Pahuja describe their experiences in using web-based teaching to facilitate active learning in a seminar entitled Globalisation and the Law and taken by separate groups of law students located in Canada and Australia. On a related theme, under Distance Education, Salzer looks at the first US Internet law school, which has graduated its first crop of students with what he wryly calls a ‘Juris Doctor.com’ and how the criticism of and resistance from the legal education traditionalists has denied the school ABA accreditation.

The remaining articles are a mixed bag. In the same issue of the Journal of Legal Education as the two earlier articles under Research, Jackson develops an extended argument for the introduction of a course, similar to one at Harvard Law School, called Analytical Methods for Lawyers. Ashford examines a possible new role for legal academics in designing and delivering in-house training and CLE programs as part of a ‘modern legal apprenticeship’ as an attractive alternative both for law firms and students to the traditional qualifying route. Van Zandt contends that in future law faculties will be strongly discipline based, not only fluent in the workings of law and legal institutions, but also strong in their methodological and theoretical training in research methods and ideas. Under Context, Criticism & Theory appears a somewhat philosophical article by Bix on law as an autonomous discipline and the implications of this notion for legal education.

MacCrate, in an article positioned under Legal Education Generally, re-examines the stance taken in and progress made since the 1992 publication of the MacCrate Narrowing the Gap Report with respect to building the continuum of legal education and professional development. Finally, under Teachers there is a report on the empirical study carried out by Redding into the backgrounds and characteristics of those entering law teaching today which presents a statistical analysis of the factors predicting law faculty hiring. He discovers that where a faculty candidate went to law school is more predictive than subsequent scholarship and professional and teaching accomplishments and that most law teachers graduated from a handful of elite law schools.