Booth, Tracy --- "Learning Environments, Economic Rationalism And Criminal Law: Towards Quality Teaching And Learning Outcomes" [2001] UTSLawRw 4; (2001) 3 University of Technology Sydney Law Review 17

• I: Background to the Project
• II: The Teaching and Learning Package
• III: Subject Evaluation
• IV: Conclusions and Reflection

Learning Environments, Economic Rationalism And Criminal Law: Towards Quality Teaching And Learning Outcomes

Tracey Booth[*]

THE DELIVERY of legal education has changed dramatically over the last decade. In their seminal work, The Quiet (R)evolution, Le Brun and Johnstone aimed to improve the quality of teaching in the classroom so as to produce quality learning outcomes for law students.[1] Almost a decade later, however, the development of new teaching media and the impact of economic rationalism on tertiary education have replaced the concept of the static classroom with more varied and flexible learning environments. The current challenge for university teachers is to ensure that quality learning outcomes can be nonetheless achieved in the new learning environments and in spite of the economic constraints.

Modern educational theory espousing deep, student-centred learning takes on an almost utopian aspect in the face of the impact of economic rationalism on tertiary education. Features of a typical tertiary education landscape include: scarce resources, increasing student enrolments, casualisation of teaching staff, onerous administrative burdens, pressure to produce particular types of research outcomes[2] and associated tensions and stresses of the university workplace. As a result, the teaching ‘business’ of universities is delivered through many-layered frameworks of constraints, the effects of which may be either to dictate teaching modes for particular subjects or to pressure academics to utilise particular teaching modes. Anecdotal evidence suggests that university teachers have coped with these constraints by using lectures in place of tutorials, increasing the size of tutorials, reducing the number of tutorials for a subject and implementing web-based teaching strategies.

In February 2000, the Faculty of Management at the University of Western Sydney, Hawkesbury, awarded me a teaching grant of $3,240.31. The grant funded a project to develop fresh teaching and learning strategies in the LLB subject Criminal Law. This article seeks to explain how the teaching and learning strategies subsequently developed accommodated learning aims that sought to facilitate deep and holistic learning by students, utilised both traditional and new teaching media and produced quality learning outcomes for students. The goal of the project was to facilitate deep student learning by creating a high quality learning environment wherein students could actively engage with the subject, develop life-long learning skills and hopefully enjoy the learning experience.[3]

I: Background to the Project

WHY CHANGE THE TEACHING AND LEARNING STRATEGIES IN CRIMINAL LAW?

Criminal law is the second of eight core LLB subjects that are offered to law students at UWS, Hawkesbury.[4] First year students usually attempt the subject in their second semester at university. Up to and including 1998, the subject was delivered to small groups, four hours per week, in two, two-hour weekly seminars. Annual student enrolment in the subject had not exceeded twenty two. The teaching strategies employed in the seminars were familiar small group strategies that aimed to encourage student participation and reflection, although these were occasionally supplemented with short lectures to provide students with an over-view of a topic and/or clarification of difficult principles or concepts. As a result of external pressures to increase student enrolment, approximately thirty five students enrolled in the subject in 1999. However the subject continued to be taught in two weekly two-hour seminars to the larger group.

Unfortunately, the seminar techniques formerly used with the smaller groups did not work as effectively with a larger cohort. Student participation in the seminars was problematic and frequently unproductive. The use of lectures steadily increased with at least one hour (more usually two hours) per week formally given over to a didactic lecture format. These problems were exacerbated by the physical teaching space. Both classes had to be held in a tiered lecture theatre because there were no tutorial rooms with flat space large enough to accommodate a group of thirty two.

The problems associated with teaching a relatively large group and the physical constraints introduced by a tiered teaching space appeared to encourage students to adopt a passive approach to their learning (better described as ‘listening’).[5] Symptomatic of this passivity were:

• a lack of preparation for class (students did not do the required reading or prepare answers to the prescribed seminar questions);
• a lack of meaningful class participation by most students;
• a lack of interest in the subject matter of the subject;
• a reluctance to engage with the subject matter or in discussion with the lecturer or fellow students;
• a reluctance to participate in small ‘buzz’ groups or other small group teaching techniques;
• a dependency on lectures and the lecturer to acquire knowledge;
• a tendency to focus on discrete matters perceived to be relevant to assessment tasks;
• an inability to concentrate; and
• a discernible lack of progress in the development of skills such as case analysis, legal problem solving or written and oral communication generally.

Following a largely unstimulating and unenjoyable experience teaching criminal law in 1999 and presumably a similarly bereft learning experience for the students,[6] I was highly motivated to rework the educational aims and objectives of the subject and existing methods of subject delivery. In these circumstances, I developed a project to clarify the aims and learning objectives and to create a teaching environment that would facilitate deep student-centred learning and be interesting, enjoyable and stimulating for all participants.[7]

CONSTRAINTS

The review and development of teaching and learning strategies in criminal law was limited in two respects. First, limits within the (then) federated University of Western Sydney structure meant that the assessment regime was inflexible and no additional assessment tasks such as class participation could be included. However, teaching strategies were developed and implemented at the discretion of the individual faculties and/or campuses and the academic staff involved. Second, a constraint occurred at faculty level. The increase in student numbers was not sufficient to warrant an increase in hours allocated to the face-to-face teaching of the subject each week. Thus, four hours of face-to-face teaching was to continue for the larger groups for the time being.[8]

CLARIFICATION OF LEARNING AIMS FOR CRIMINAL LAW

The process of designing and developing appropriate teaching and learn- ing strategies began with formulating the likely student profile of a first year law student at UWS, Hawkesbury. [9] On the basis of previous student cohorts and admission procedures nearly all of the students were expected to be young school leavers and more than half would come from non-English-speaking backgrounds. Other than in the secondary school subject, Legal Studies, most students would have had little experience in law related areas.

Given this student profile in a framework of deep, holistic student-centred learning, the following learning aims were clarified.[10]

• To encourage students to engage actively with the subject and consequently to take a deep approach to learning, thereby developing skills to examine the subject matter critically, question existing assumptions and build on their personal experiences.[11]
• To provide a clear and easily-accessed learning environment with well-defined learning objectives appropriate to first year students.
• To encourage students to take responsibility for their own learning, learn at their own pace and develop skills for independent learning.
• To facilitate an interactive learning environment in the seminars.
• To encourage students to engage in collaborative learning with fellow students.
• To introduce students to web-based learning strategies.
• To create a more collegiate environment for learning.
• To facilitate development of competencies essential to the discipline of law including: written and oral communication skills, legal argument, legal problem solving, case analysis and statutory interpretation skills.
• To foster an enjoyable and stimulating learning environment for both students and the lecturer.

The challenge was to develop and implement teaching strategies which would foster such learning aims in appropriate learning environments.

II: The Teaching and Learning Package

Ultimately, the package developed reduced face-to-face teaching to a weekly two-hour seminar for each student in small groups, discontinued lectures altogether, utilised on-line discussion forums and incorporated the use of varied resources including specially-written materials. In addition to the weekly seminar, a specific two-hour period was set aside each week for student consultation with me if additional support was needed. Interestingly, students did not take advantage of this additional face-to-face time, nor was assistance sought at alternative times. The package sought to create flexible and active learning environments that would promote student engagement with the subject matter and encourage deep learning. The student profile required that the learning environments could be easily accessed with well-structured learning objectives.

To lessen student passivity and dependence on the lecturer, the development of independent learning skills and capacity for reflection were crucial to the package. The teaching strategies developed to promote independent learning centred on the use of written materials and the on-line discussion forums. The written materials included the prescribed textbook, relevant legislation, supplementary materials and the reading guide. A reading guide, written for each topic, was designed to be the critical link between the various resources and teaching strategies.

A significant aim was to introduce students to web-based teaching and learning strategies in a manner that would both facilitate the learning aims of the project and increase the flexibility of the learning environment. On-line discussion forums were utilised to reinforce independent learning and to promote collaborative learning between students. Collaborative learning sought to ‘encourage students to confront different conceptions [of] and to practise making sense [of] for themselves’ the issues that were being raised in the materials.[12] It was also hoped that a web-based student-led learning experience would promote a new and interesting collegiate environment for the students.

Finally, despite reducing the total face-to-face teaching time for each student, face-to-face teaching was nonetheless regarded as a vital teaching and learning strategy.[13] In response to increasing enrolments, more and more law schools are utilising weekly lectures and student numbers in tutorials frequently exceed 45 in some core law subjects at UWS.[14] However the literature generally eschews the lecture as an effective teaching strategy in favour of small group teaching strategies.[15] Thus, a decision was made to abandon lectures and conduct a weekly seminar in groups of twenty students or less. The seminar was designed to facilitate active, interactive learning where students would engage with the issues and have the benefit of discussion with both the lecturer and other students.

This part focuses on the three main teaching strategies that were developed and implemented to realise the learning aims—the reading guide, the on-line discussion forum and the weekly seminar.

THE READING GUIDE

The reading guide was designed to supplant passive listening in class with active or energetic independent learning.[16] Independent learning skills encourage the student to be responsible for his or her learning rather than relying on the lecturer to provide all necessary information. Also advantageous is the fact that independent learning allows students to progress at their own pace and to retain control over what they learn and when.[17] The flexibility inherent in independent learning is necessary in view of students’ work and family commitments and for those students who may be developing and refining their reading and writing skills in English.

The reading guide was styled as a workbook with some substantive content and written to accompany the prescribed textbook and supplementary materials. As well as an overview of each topic, the guide provided specific direction to the prescribed readings and to a limited extent, ‘replaced’ lectures by including much of the material that had formerly been covered in a didactic manner for a particular topic. However, bearing in mind that ‘print still has the disadvantage of failing to be interactive, adaptive or reflective’[18], the guide incorporated particular design features:

• A clear framework to assist students to acquire knowledge and enhance their understanding of the material and develop essential legal competencies.
• A philosophical approach to the legal issues that moved beyond the ‘black letter’ of the law and placed each topic in a social, political and cultural context.
• Streamlined reading to reduce student ‘skimming’ of the cases and consequent surface learning.
• The integration of the readings with the collaborative learning exercise in the on-line discussion forums and the interactive learning environment of the seminars.[19]

1. The framework[20]

The integrative function of the reading guide was crucial and students were made aware that the prescribed weekly reading and tasks were intended to be completed prior to participation in the on-line discussion and the seminar for any given topic. Below is the table set out in the reading guide for topics one and two, illustrating the integrative function of the reading guide.

As well as an overview of the topic, the reading guide provided directions for case analysis and statutory interpretation and further tasks designed to facilitate and test student understanding of the significant issues. With a view to developing and refining certain legal competencies, students were required to prepare a case analysis of each case prescribed and the reading guide provided directions in this regard. These directions used the same model of case analysis taught in the first core LLB subject, Introduction to Law, already familiar to most of the students.

For the first few topics, the reading guide contained detailed directions that were intended to provide a model of the case analysis process for students. For instance, below is the detailed direction for the case analysis of Potisk in topic four.

3.1.1 Potisk (1973) 6 SASR 389

Read this case on p. 1142 and prepare a case analysis.

Facts

The relevant facts are set out clearly at the beginning of the judgment. What offence was the accused charged with? What are the elements of this offence? How did this case get to the Supreme Court? Explain the nature of the role of the Supreme Court in this case.

Issue

Read the questions submitted to the Supreme Court on p.1143 of the textbook. Essentially the court is concerned with whether or not the accused committed larceny. In particular, you should note and understand the issues that arise from the nature of the mistake made by the teller (was it quantity, quality or value of thing), the circumstances of the mistake (whether unilateral or mutual), the existence of otherwise of a ‘taking’ and the principle of temporal coincidence.

What was the Crown’s argument in this case (see fourth paragraph on p. 1144 of the textbook)?

Law

Larceny is defined at common law in South Australia and restated in the legislation for procedural purposes. In this case, the court was required to examine the authority of two long-standing English decisions: Middleton’s Case (1873) LR 2 CCR 38 and Ashwell’s Case (1885) 16 QBD 190. What principles were these cases authority for? Were these cases followed by the SA Supreme Court? Why or why not?

On what basis does Bray CJ distinguish the cases based on larceny by trick?

Application

Be careful to consider the application of the elements of larceny to the facts in question. Did the accused commit larceny? Why or why not?

Ratio

How did the court answer the questions posed to the Supreme Court? What was the result?

The guide usually followed the case analysis with ‘prompt’ questions or tasks to be completed by the students about the case and surrounding issues aiming to enhance student understanding of the outcomes of the case analysis just completed. Below are the questions following the Potisk case analysis in topic four.

3.1.2 Questions

• Distinguish unilateral and mutual mistakes. What might be the relevance of either type of mistake to the common law of larceny?
• How was the argument concerning the timing of the ‘taking’ relevant to the principle of temporal coincidence?
• Given the result of this case, what relevance do you think ‘dishonesty’ has for the common law of larceny?
• On what basis did Wells J. dissent? Do you agree? Why or why not?

Students were informed of expected learning outcomes through the learning objectives enumerated at the end of each reading guide. These objectives were intended to assist students in their revision of each topic and identification of the significant issues. In the table below are the learning objectives for topics one and two.

8. Learning Objectives for this Topic

Upon completion of the reading, the questions in the materials, the on-line discussion and the seminar, students should be able to:

• restate and understand the elements of the common law offence of larceny;
• distinguish the notion of a ‘taking’ in larceny from ‘appropriating’, ‘embezzling’ and ‘defrauding’;
• explain the impact of a mistake (by either party) upon the common law principles of larceny;
• distinguish the concept of possession from appropriation or ownership;
• critically analyse the concept of ‘dishonesty’ and understand the application of this concept to various property offences;
• understand and apply the distinction between larceny by trick and the offence of obtaining property by false pretences;
• understand and apply the distinctions between fraudulent appropriation, fraudulent misappropriation and larceny; and
• understand and apply the distinction between larceny by bailee and fraudulent misappropriation.

2. The law and context

In each topic, students were encouraged to reflect critically upon the traditional assumptions of the law and challenge those assumptions

by recognising the social, political and cultural contexts in which criminal laws are made and enforced. The prescribed textbook incorporated a contextual approach to studying criminal law.[21] In addition to presenting the traditional cases and legislation for analysis by students, the writers include a wide range of ‘historical, sociological, philosophical, feminist, empirical and procedural material’ in an effort to broaden the idea of what is relevant to particular criminal laws studied and why such laws exist.[22] As well as critically analysing the law, students were required to appreciate the particular social, historical and/or political context of that crime in each topic studied.

In an effort to present the subject not as a series of discrete topics but as a coherent ‘whole’, the topics were linked by a focus on the principles of criminal responsibility and the concomitant issues of criminalisation of particular persons or conduct and enforcement of particular crimes. Because the topics were linked in this manner, students were encouraged to take a broad approach to the concept of criminal laws and the impact of social, historical or political contexts. It was hoped that such a move away from traditional teaching of ‘black letter law’ would serve to develop student skills of critical analysis and avoid rote learning of discrete areas. In addition, students would be encouraged to question existing assumptions and build on their personal experiences of each topic.

3. Reading

Subject evaluations in previous years had identified student concerns that too much weekly reading was prescribed. Certainly in 1999, most students simply did not do the reading or only a small proportion of that prescribed. The amount of reading appropriate for each class and what academics can reasonably expect students to achieve is a matter for constant debate. However, many theorists argue that academics tend to overburden students with reading and in such circumstances, it is difficult to expect effective student engagement with the subject matter.[23]

Given the student profile and my aim to foster deep learning, I decided to streamline the reading and focus on ‘depth’ rather than ‘breadth’ of each topic.[24] The reading subsequently prescribed was generally kept to less than 30 pages for each topic and confined to seminal cases or those cases providing useful examples of the operation of the principles. Significant commentary was also included. To assuage those niggling feelings of unease that students may be ‘missing out’ on significant material, seminar questions were frequently used to illustrate omitted cases.

Reduction in the amount of reading for each topic was expected to make engagement with the subject matter less daunting for first year students. According to this reasoning, the less material required to be read, the more reading students would complete instead of simply skim-reading the material or disregarding it altogether.

4. Integration

The reading guide had a critical integrative function because it provided the framework for the sequencing of the teaching and learning strategies and the use of various resources. The teaching and learning strategies were a carefully planned sequence of learning events to be completed in the following order for each topic:

• Do the prescribed reading as directed by the reading guide.
• Complete the tasks set out in the reading guide.
• Participate in the on-line discussion forum.
• Reflect on and review the issues in preparation of answers to seminar questions.
• Participate in the weekly seminar and further reflection and review of the issues.
• Review the learning objectives at the end of the reading guide for that topic.

The guide provided the location of the prescribed reading and was the source for the on-line and seminar questions. Through the process of case analysis and statutory interpretation, the provision of critical commentary and the inclusion of tasks for completion, the guide operated directly to assist students to acquire knowledge and enhance their understanding of the issues.

THE ON-LINE DISCUSSION FORUM

In the last few years, there has been considerable pressure placed on academics to utilise tools of web-based learning with a view to implementing ‘flexible’ delivery strategies and reducing the costs of subject delivery.[25] Unfortunately, much of the use of the web is not necessarily dictated by teaching and learning objectives, rather the medium is chosen and teaching and learning objectives are grafted on as applicable. However, the literature provides many examples of effective teaching through the web and it now seems clear that quality learning can be achieved through this medium provided it is carefully integrated with other teaching and learning strategies and supported by learning aims.[26]

At UWS, Hawkesbury, a system is in place—the Hawkesbury Web Interactive Study Environment (WISE)—which has created web-based learning packages for use in subjects offered by the university. The WISE team provides excellent support to both staff and students for the web-based teaching and learning strategies through training of both staff and students. Training for criminal law students took place at the beginning of semester in order to give students ample opportunity to master the medium before commencement of the on-line discussion forums.

As well as reviewing the literature, I was aware of web-based teaching strategies being utilised by colleagues in other law schools with varying degrees of success. Ultimately, this teaching strategy was selected as an active and collegiate learning environment to facilitate both independent and collaborative learning. It was envisaged that the medium could:

• provide students with a forum in which to actively articulate their ideas;
• enhance student understanding of a topic;
• enhance student communication and computer skills;
• provide a flexible environment for learning; and
• encourage student reflection of the ideas of other students..

A forum in which to actively articulate ideas

Students were randomly allocated to on-line discussion groups of no more than five and assigned particular questions for discussion each week. On-line participation required students to set out their answers to the questions in the body of an email and simply post that message to their forum group on the bulletin board. These questions were designed to explore significant issues raised by a topic and prompt reflection of those issues prior to completing the work for the seminar. Thus, having articulated their ideas before attempting the work for the seminar, students would get more out of the seminar and be more confident in presenting their ideas.

Enhance student understanding

Participation in the on-line forum required students to actively engage with the issues and encouraged independent learning. The questions were aimed at identifying significant issues raised by the topic and enhancing student understanding of those issues. The table on the following page sets out the questions for the on-line discussion of topic four.

1. On-line Discussion Questions

After completing the prescribed reading and the questions above, you are required to participate in an on-line discussion concerning issues arising from this topic. The questions for discussion are set out below. Answers to these questions are to be posted to the bulletin board on this subject’s web page for consideration by your on-line discussion group between Wed. 2nd August and 6.00pm Friday 4th August. Each answer should be between 200 — 300 words. You may reply to answers posted by other students at any time provided your reply does not exceed 100 words.

• In the case of Postisk why was the accused not guilty of larceny? Should the accused have been found guilty of a criminal offence? Why or why not?
• Should the concept of dishonesty be tested according to subjective or objective standards of criminal responsibility? Why?

Student communication skills

This web-based teaching and learning strategy required students to write their answers and communicate those answers to other students and the lecturer. Moreover, effective learning via this strategy required students to have basic computer skills and access to a computer and the Internet. In view of the importance of computers and the Internet generally in the legal workplace, development of these skills was considered essential.

A flexible environment for learning

A period of approximately three days was scheduled each week to allow students to post answers to the on-line discussion forum.[27] The time frame was intended to allow students to learn at their own pace. Moreover, it was intended to support students’ work and family commitments and any problems with communication in English. According to this schedule, students had time to reflect on the issues before preparing for the seminar. The short period of time between the on-line discussion and the seminar also gave me time to peruse the answers posted by the discussion groups. I intended to address any misconceptions that may have been demonstrated by students on-line in the following seminar.

Student reflection of the ideas of other students

Only those students who were members of a particular discussion forum had access to the material posted to that group. Students were encouraged to read and reflect upon the answers posted by the other students in their group and respond to those ideas thereby creating a collaborative discussion of the issues. The on-line discussion group was intended to operate as a supportive and collegiate environment that students could enjoy with each other without the overt presence of the lecturer.

The Seminar

For this purpose, the cohort was divided into two small seminar groups. The seminar was regarded as a crucial step in the carefully sequenced teaching and learning strategies outlined above and students were expected to come to the seminar with some experience of the legal issues involved. Students gained experience of the issues through the completion of the following work prior to attending the seminar:

• the prescribed reading;
• the questions and tasks in the reading guide for a particular topic;
• the on-line discussion; and
• preparation of answers to the assigned seminar problems.

Most of the seminar problems were designed to enhance student understanding of the law and test their comprehension of the readings through application of the law to different problems. Such ‘problem method’ seminar questions are a familiar tool to most legal academics and frequently used.[28] However, not all seminar questions used this problem method to test student understanding and critical appreciation of the issues. Other types of questions required students to explore key issues from a more critical perspective. For instance, the questions below were included in the seminar questions in the topic dealing with sexual assault.

Peter Rush, in his book Criminal Law (1997) p. 203, suggests that Morgan’s case demonstrates ‘that both the rapist and the law of intention could not care less about the intentions and desires of the woman victim’. Do you agree? Why or why not? Do you think that the current law with respect to the mens rea of sexual assault is appropriate? Why or why not?

Being a significant part of the interactive learning strategy, the seminars were structured so as to create an active and non-threatening learning environment. Although the lecturer led the seminar, students were required to participate. To this end, they were provided with opportunities to discuss the seminar questions and the issues arising from the topic with the lecturer and other students. The process of discussing the seminar questions also contributed to the development of student competencies in case analysis, statutory interpretation, critical analysis and legal problem-solving as well as facilitating student reflection and review of the topic.

III: Subject Evaluation

Twenty-nine students completed subject evaluation surveys at the end of semester. The questions in the survey instrument were drafted in a manner to enable student responses to be recorded on a general purpose answer sheet according to a scale with five possible responses: strongly disagree, disagree, unsure, agree and strongly agree. Extra space was provided on the survey instrument wherein students were invited to make further comment on any aspect of the subject. Given the learning aims and the major teaching strategies utilised in the subject, this part will focus on student responses to those survey questions relating to the reading guide, the on-line discussion forum and the seminars.

THE READING GUIDE

The guide was both distributed in hard copy and posted to the subject web page. No marks were allocated for completion of the tasks in the guide and the guides were not collected, marked or checked during the semester. The relevant survey questions and student responses are collated in the table below.

Independent learning tool

Overall, the response to the reading guide as an independent learning tool was very positive. All students surveyed agreed that the reading guides helped them to understand each topic. Seventy six per cent of students usually read the reading guides each week, 89 per cent found the guides easy to follow, 90 per cent found them to be a valuable guide to each topic and 82 per cent agreed that the guides provided easy-to-understand direction to the prescribed readings. There were no negative comments made by students about the reading guides. On the other hand, students made many favourable comments. For example:

• I really like the reading guides. They were extremely helpful because they were a general outline and a condensed sort of version of the text reading.
• I found the reading guide helpful as it outlines the important issues.
• The reading guide was an excellent way to assist our understanding of the weekly topics.

Tasks and prompt questions

On the other hand, student responses to the tasks or ‘prompt’ questions in the guide, which were designed to enhance their understanding of the topic and engage the students in energetic learning, were more ambivalent. Forty one per cent of students usually used the prompts to prepare for the seminars whereas 34 per cent of students did not and 24 per cent were unsure. One can only speculate as to the significance of the large percentage of ‘unsure’ responses although perhaps since ‘unsure’ was the middle of the scale, it may have been intended to reflect more spasmodic use of the tasks or generally a neutral response. Unfortunately, there were no additional comments from students on this issue.

Given that almost half of the students did actively engage with the tasks in the guide, I do not think that this aspect of the guide can be described as unsuccessful. The challenge is to persuade the recalcitrant students to utilise this learning opportunity. A solution might be to provide a detailed explanation about the role of the tasks in the reading guide in the context of student learning and include those tasks in the assessment schedule for the subject.[29] In any event, because 51 per cent of students agreed that there were too many tasks for each topic, the number of tasks should be reduced or consolidated.

Learning Objectives

Students should be informed of the learning outcomes expected of them.[30] Interestingly, student responses to this issue were also equivocal. Forty eight per cent of students agreed that the learning objectives for each topic were a valuable guide to understanding the topic whereas 6 per cent disagreed and 38 per cent were unsure. Given that the learning objectives aimed to assist students to identify the major issues in a topic, these results, particularly the relatively high percentage of ‘unsure’, probably indicate that many students did not fully appreciate this purpose. Whilst it is essential that learning objectives continue to be included in the reading guide, more detailed explanation of their purpose in the subject outline is required.

Matters for reflection

The results support the contention that the reading guide was a successful teaching and learning strategy. The guide created a well-structured learning environment that was easily accessed by the students. Students were encouraged to actively engage with the subject through the guide’s direction to readings and its tasks or prompt questions. The guide also facilitated the development of student competencies in case analysis, statutory interpretation and critical analysis. Its format required students to take control of their own learning at their own pace. This flexibility was certainly advantageous for those students with work or family commitments and/or difficulties with the English language.

Despite the positive feedback, I am concerned that many students tended to depend on the guide as a primary source of knowledge and containing definitive statements of the law rather than using it to actively engage with the law in the prescribed readings. In seminars I often observed that many students had read the guide for a particular topic but not the prescribed material. Furthermore, when asked to provide a statement of law on a particular issue, many students turned to the reading guide instead of the relevant case or section.

Student resistance to doing the prescribed reading is a common complaint of legal academics. Moreover, given that these students were first year and no doubt lacked confidence in their ability to effectively locate and recite the law, reliance on the reading guide is not surprising. I do not raise this concern to suggest that the reading guides should be discontinued but rather to indicate that more thought must be given to developing techniques that counter student dependence on this secondary source and promote student confidence.

The On-line Discussion Forum

Participation was assessed on a satisfactory/unsatisfactory basis and a satisfactory result required students to post answers to 10 of 12 topics. An unsatisfactory result could cause a student to fail the subject. Relevant survey questions and students responses are collated in the table below.

Student access to and use of the technology

The findings revealed no significant or continuing problems with student access to or use of this medium. Many students clearly had access to the internet at home but those who did not seemed to have no difficulty accessing the web page at either the university or through an external internet provider. Only one student commented that access to the web page was not easy but details of this difficulty were not provided. Most students demonstrated sufficient competence to use the technology from the outset and I observed that all students were competently using the web page at the end of the first three weeks of semester.

Independent learning tool

An important object of this teaching strategy was to provide a forum to further independent learning whereby students could clarify the issues and articulate their ideas in a supportive, flexible environment. Given this opportunity for reflection, it was intended that students would get more out of the seminar because they would engage in the ensuing discussion with some experience of the issues.

The survey revealed that a majority of students agreed that participation in the on-line discussion helped them understand the topics. Fifty six per cent of students agreed that participation helped them clarify their ideas. Sixty two per cent of students found that participation made their contribution to the seminar more effective and sixty six per cent agreed that participation helped them feel more confident participating in the subsequent seminar on the topic.

It is contended that these results support the view that this teaching strategy was an effective independent learning tool that enhanced student understanding of the topic and contributed to more effective learning in the seminars. Certainly, I am encouraged by the positive response. In the past I had found that although students may have prepared answers to the seminar questions, they had not yet clarified their ideas to the point of being confident to present them. This impediment to learning was no doubt exacerbated by the students being first year and having to confront unfamiliar areas of knowledge with new skills. Through the process of clarifying and articulating their ideas, students construct a base of knowledge from which to approach the issues and prepare answers to the seminar questions. Having access to the ideas of other students was intended to give students a broader perspective on which to construct this base of knowledge.

However, despite the positive response from a majority of students, the relatively strong figures in dissent must be considered. In this regard, the high percentage of students who have responded as ‘unsure’ is striking. Again, one can only speculate as to the significance of this response. I would argue that given most students’ good performance in the seminars, this response should be interpreted as intended to be ‘neutral’ and not necessarily condemnatory of the learning strategy. The web-based learning strategy was a new learning experience for most students and it is likely that the students would have approached it with varying degrees of caution.

Collaborative Learning

A significant objective of this teaching strategy was to facilitate collaborative learning with other students. However, the survey revealed that many students did not exercise the collaborative learning opportunities. Despite the fact that the majority of students posted answers to the on-line forum and 66 per cent usually read the responses posted by other students, only 20 per cent of students usually responded to the answers of other student members of their group. Forty eight per cent of students did not usually respond to answers from other students and 31 per cent were unsure whether they did not or not. I have interpreted this ‘unsure’ response to mean that response to other students was more spasmodic. Only 31 per cent of students agreed that the on-line discussions resulted in meaningful discussions of the subject with other students.

Unfortunately, the results indicate that while many students did take advantage of the forums to consider the views of other students, most did not exercise the opportunity to engage in active, collaborative learning with each other. Unfortunately, additional comments by students do not clarify this result. However, a reasonable conclusion is that lack of familiarity with collaborative learning caused students to shy away from it and avoidance was easy because collaboration was not compulsory. In future, this problem could be resolved by providing a thorough explanation of collaborative learning and developing and implementing a structured set of assessable tasks aimed at promoting collaborative learning.

Collegiate Learning Environment

The teaching and learning strategies were structured to provide students with a variety of learning environments. No doubt, a face-to-face teaching environment is crucial for effective learning.[31] Nonetheless, first year students often find it difficult to settle into the demands of university classes. The on-line learning environment was intended to promote a student-centred collegiate environment away from the more intimidating and relatively formal seminar situation.

This strategy also provided a forum in which to hear those shy or inarticulate students who rarely take the opportunity to speak in class. Many students are excluded from the learning process in law classes because they are unable to participate. Posting answers to an on-line forum alleviated many problems associated with class participation and provided a richer learning environment for all students. The survey revealed that most students participated in this learning environment thus giving more students opportunities to be heard.

Should this teaching strategy be used again?

Fifty nine per cent of students did not find the on-line discussions more valuable than another hour of face-to-face teaching whereas 35 per cent did and 7 per cent were unsure. Forty five per cent recommended that the strategy be used again whereas 31 per cent disagreed—21 per cent were unsure. As to whether they would like more on-line learning opportunities in other subjects, 45 per cent of students agreed, 31 per cent disagreed and 24 per cent were unsure. Overall, 55 per cent of students found the on-line discussion forums a valuable learning tool, 20 per cent did not and 24 per cent were unsure.

A few students provided additional remarks. On the positive side students wrote:

• Due to the on-line discussions, it was sometimes much easier to understand the topic.
• The web page was a great idea. By using the on-line discussion, I felt that it aided in my learning of the topic. It also prepared me for the following week’s seminar
• I definitely thought that the on-line work was worth while and much better that more time at uni because it made you read and think outside the class.

On the other hand, there were students who responded negatively to the strategy:

• On-line discussions was [sic] a waste of time and didn’t assist in the learning of this particular subject. It didn’t help at all.
• I feel that on-line discussions do not help that much. I learn a lot more and understand a lot more by attending seminars each week when we go through questions.
• I felt that on-line discussions was a waste of time. It didn’t really help me in anyway. I would have rather had an extra hour in this subject than completing on-line discussions.

Although, I cannot argue that the web-based teaching and learning strategy was a huge success, the fact that a significant number of students did benefit and responded positively provides a basis for contending that this strategy should be retained. Clearly, and quite rightly, students regard face-to-face teaching as very important to their learning. However, the on-line forums did not seek to displace face-to-face teaching. In fact, the forums were intended to enhance the face-to-face learning experience and arguably did so for the majority of students. In this way, the web is simply another active learning environment in which to engage with the subject. Student resistance may be a product of difficulties with complying a tight timeline and a cautious approach to unfamiliar teaching techniques. The on-line discussion forums should be retained, albeit with more structured tasks for each topic and stated criteria against which students can be assessed in a meaningful manner. Lecturer participation that would contribute to student reassurance and provide some feedback is also worth considering.

THE SEMINAR

The lecturer led the weekly two-hour seminar and each seminar had no more than 20 students.[32] Although no formal marks were allocated for seminar participation, attendance was compulsory and students could fail the subject if they did not attend 10 seminars during the semester. All students were required to participate and most students complied with this requirement. The relevant survey questions and student responses are collated in the table below.

Seminar Participation

Sixty-five per cent of students agreed that the size of the seminar groups promoted class discussion—only seven per cent disagreed. As one student commented: ‘It was good having the small groups as it aided learning.’ Seventy six per cent of students felt encouraged to participate and 62 per cent of students felt comfortable when asking the seminar leader questions during the seminar. These findings support the contention that the small size of the group was beneficial to student learning and contributed to effective student participation.

Seminar Questions

Almost two thirds of the students agreed that they usually did the weekly prescribed reading while 17 per cent disagreed and 21 per cent of students were unsure (presumably this means they read occasionally). The seminar questions were specifically designed to pull together the issues raised in the readings, the tasks in the guide and the on-line discussion forum. Less than half of the students surveyed (44 per cent) usually prepared answers to the seminar questions before each seminar. While interesting, this finding is not particularly disturbing. The seminars were generally lively and the majority of students regularly participated. Perhaps formal preparation was unnecessary if the tasks in reading guide and the on-line forum were completed beforehand. Students already had had the opportunity to reflect on the issues raised in the seminar.

Interactive Learning Tool

The findings that 80 per cent of students agreed that the seminars were interesting and challenging and 83 per cent of students agreed that the seminars enhanced their understanding of the topic support the contention that the seminars provided an effective learning environment. Additional positive comments were made about the seminars:

• The seminars were very good because after doing the reading at home it brought it all together and cleared up any problems in the readings.
• The seminars weren’t so bad because they were actually interesting.

Interactive learning is essential to effective student learning and should be continued in the small seminar groups. The seminar questions provided clear well-structured tasks and the seminar style encouraged students to actively engage with the issues. It is contended that the small size of the seminar groups and the preparatory work in the reading guide and on-line, fostered an enjoyable and stimulating learning environment in the seminars for all. However, students commented that seminar participation should have been assessable given that students were required to participate each week. This is a valid comment and should be taken on board when determining assessment policies.

IV: Conclusions and Reflection

The goal of this project was to create energetic, flexible learning environments that would support independent student learning, introduce students to collaborative learning with other students, promote interactive learning in small groups and improve the overall quality of teaching and learning. Energetic learning is necessary to facilitate student engagement with the subject material and thereby promote active and deep learning. Flexibility in teaching and learning is also essential to allow students to proceed at their own pace and in the manner which best suits them. Certainly, the teaching strategies incorporated in this package required energetic learning by students and the inherent flexibility gave students much freedom.

Although the low numbers of students studying criminal law at UWS, Hawkesbury, suggest something of a teaching luxury, it is contended that the teaching and learning strategies used in this package could also be utilised with a larger cohort. Initially, the academic’s workload would be burdened with the task of writing the reading guide to accompany the textbook and integrate the various the teaching and learning strategies. However, running the on-line discussion forums was not particularly onerous and I was fortunate to receive excellent support from the information technology staff on campus. Most universities provide easy-to-use web packages that allow on-line subject delivery. The challenge is to incorporate this new teaching media in a meaningful way that promotes the learning aims of the subject. Finally, seminars are already a familiar technique to most academics and the small number of students in each group contributes to the creation of an effective learning environment.

Overall, the evaluations and my own impressions suggest that energetic and flexible learning environments were achieved. Most importantly, teaching and learning were both stimulating and enjoyable experiences for the lecturer and the majority of students. The carefully sequenced teaching strategies reflected the learning aims of the subject in a logical manner and the resources used complemented the process. The results showed that the majority of students were willing to engage with the processes of active independent and interactive learning. Collaborative learning was not as successful but sufficient numbers of students engaged in this process to suggest that it should nevertheless be continued with more structured tasks.

In formulating teaching and learning strategies it must be accepted that no matter how many opportunities are offered to students to improve the quality of their learning, not all students will take up these opportunities. Student motivation is problematic and much research energy has been expended in trying to determine why some students are motivated to learn in particular circumstances and others are not.[33] Although all students cannot be expected to actively participate in the manner desired by the teacher, the results in this subject demonstrate enough student resistance to warrant further attention and the development of additional strategies in particular areas.

Student motivation to engage with the teaching and learning strategies may be increased by amending the existing assessment structure to reflect a reward system familiar to most students. For example, awarding students marks for the quality of their participation and contribution to the collaborative learning process in the on-line discussion forums would encourage students to actively engage in this strategy and thus, further the aim of collaborative learning. As well as a more focused reward system, students might benefit from further explanation regarding the teaching strategies and the learning outcomes hoped to be achieved. Like the informed consumer, an informed student is better able to make choices about their learning and the quality of the experience they wish to achieve.

Ultimately, it is the university teacher’s job to facilitate quality learning with quality teaching within the constraints that currently burden tertiary education. However, once provided with quality learning opportunities, students must accept responsibility to fully utilise those opportunities.

[*]Lecturer, School of Sociology and Justice Studies, University of Western Sydney. I would like to thank Lawrence McNamara for his insightful comments on earlier drafts of this article and his ruthless use of a red pen.

[1]Le Brun, M. and Johnstone, R., The Quiet (R)evolution: Improving Student Learning in Law, Law Book, Sydney, 1994.

[2]These research outcomes are those that are recognised as bringing in external funds to universities according to a formula set by Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.

[3]The theoretical framework for this project—deep, holistic student-centred learning—was largely drawn from the works of Paul Ramsden and Diana Laurillard. In particular see, Ramsden, P, Learning to Teach in Higher Education, Routledge, London, 1992 and Laurillard, D, Rethinking University Teaching, Routledge, 1993.

[4]In the formerly federated structure of the University of Western Sydney, UWS Hawkesbury did not offer a law degree. However, by agreement between UWS Macarthur and UWS Hawkesbury, a Law Transfer program was offered, p.Hawkesbury. In this program students enrolled in a BCom, p.Hawkesbury which was a standard three year degree. However, students were required to complete eight core law subjects in the course of this degree. These core law subjects were identical in content and assessment to those delivered in the law degree programs, p.UWS Macarthur. Upon completion of their BCom, p.Hawkesbury, students transferred to either UWS Nepean or UWS Macarthur to complete their LLBs. Thus, the Law Transfer program offered something of a ‘boutique’ law program to students.

[5]Ramsden, Op. cit. n.2, p.pp. 46-47. By ‘passive’ I mean that students tended to focus on discrete issues and tasks for the purposes of assessment. Most students did not seek to understand the significance of the concepts or build a picture of the content of the subject into a coherent whole. The students demonstrated reluctance to learn independently and expressed a preference for ‘spoonfeeding’ by the lecturer. Furthermore, students did not prepare for classes in a manner that indicated any reflection upon the issues and the resulting work submitted by students indicated a failure to develop any meaningful problem-solving techniques or general awareness of the necessity to develop any such skills.

[6]These conclusions are largely based on personal observation. Ironically student evaluations were not particularly negative and, in fact, most students responded well to the teaching in the subject. However, because I found the experience so unstimulating and unenjoyable and the students seemed so prepared to accept an unstimulating learning experience, I conclude that their learning experience was bereft. The fact that students were not particularly aware of their loss simply exacerbates the problem.

7 Not only students but the lecturer should enjoy the learning experience.

[8]This faculty decision was a result of a combination of factors including budgetary constraints, policy and availability of appropriately qualified part time teaching staff.

[9]Johnstone, R. and Joughin, G., Designing Print Materials for Flexible Teaching and Learning in Law, Cavendish Publishing, Sydney, 1997, p.p.25.

[10]I use ‘aims’ to mean ‘general statements of educational intent’ while ‘objectives’ are ‘more specific and concrete statements of what students are expected to learn’. Ramsden, Op. cit. n.2, p.p.130

[11]Ramsden, Op. cit. n.2 and Laurillard, Op. cit. no..2.

[12]Ramsden, Ibid, p.p.168.

[13]Goldring, J., ‘Coping With the Virtual Campus: Some Hints and Opportunities for Legal Education’ [1995] LegEdRev 5; (1995) 6(1) Legal Education Review 91.

[14]These tutorial figures are based on figures for the core law subjects, p.UWS taught on the Parramatta campus.

[15]Ramsden, Op. cit. n.2, p.pp 152-156, Le Brun and Johnstone, Op. cit. n.1, p.p.258.

[16]Ramsden, Op. cit. n.2, p.p.167

[17]Laurillard, Op. cit. n.2, p.p.192

[18]Ibid, p.p.110

[19]Ibid

[20]See Johnstone and Joughin, Op. cit. and Laurillard, op cit, for comprehensive discussions of putting together such written materials. Johnstone and Joughin would describe the reading guide as a type of ‘wrap around’, p.p.34.

[21]Brown, D. et al, Criminal Laws in NSW, Federation Press, Sydney, 2nd ed. 1996.

[22]Ibid, p.p.3.

[23]Ramsden, Op. cit. n.2, p.p.162.

[24]Laurillard, Op. cit. n.2, p.p.110.

[25]McNamara, L., ‘Lecturing (and not Lecturing): Developing a Teaching Strategy for Web-Based Lectures’ (2001) 12 Legal Education Review (forthcoming).

[26]Ibid. See also Thomas, P. et al, ‘A Holistic Approach to Supporting Distance Learning Using the Internet: Transformation, not Translation’, (1998) 29(2) British Journal of Educational Technology 149-161, Selwyn, N., ‘Virtual Concerns: Restrictions of the Internet as a Learning Environment’, (1999) 30(1) British Journal of Educative Technology 69-71.

[27]This period was spelled out clearly in the reading guide. See the table referred to in the discussion of the reading guide.

[28]Le Brun Op. cit. n.1, p.p.303

[29]Laurillard Op. cit. n.2, p.p.94

[30]Ramsden Op. cit. n.2, p.pp. 133-134

[31]Goldring Op. cit., p.n. 13, p.pp. 110-112

[32]Tutorials conducted in the non-law subjects in the Faculty generally had 25-30 students so 20 students or less was an unusually small group.

[33]Laurillard, Op. cit. no.2