Barker, D --- "From the Editor" [2007] LegEdDig 21; (2007) 15(2) Legal Education Digest 3

From the Editor

Professor David Barker AM

[2007] LegEdDig 21; (2007) 15(2) Legal Education Digest 3

It is one of the pleasant side-effects of the position of Editor of the Digest to receive feedback on the contents of previous editions. It is also encouraging for all those involved in its production to learn that many of the improvements which have been made to recent editions such as the wider, global themes and the change in format have been appreciated by our readers.

The re-introduction of a Book Review has been embraced by the Legal Publishers and in this edition there is a review of ‘Law for Educators’ by J. Jackson and S. Varnham. At a time when legal educators are striving to improve their programs in order to enhance the quality of legal graduates, it is important that there is a publication like the Digest to record these efforts and ensure that they are disseminated to as wide an audience as possible.

It is appropriate therefore that the first article digested, under Access to Law School, examines the results of a survey studying the information literacy of incoming law students. Although admitting that there were limitations on a survey restricted to only seven law schools, Gallacher is able to point to the fact that 740 students responded to the survey. One of the objectives of the survey was to identify student reactions to some of the various skills they would learn in law school, with the incoming students predictably ranking legal analysis, written communication and oral communication as the three most important skills. One interesting outcome of the survey is that incoming law students overestimate their writing skills and that consequently they resent the problems which are created when they undertake legal writing courses as part of the graduate studies. There is the same outcome in respect of the research portion of a first-year writing and research course. The conclusion of the survey is that there are identifiable problems with incoming law student information literacy that are serious and demand attention.

Accreditation, although a crucial element in the defining of legal education, does not often feature in articles in the Digest. However Garon makes up for this paucity in the literature on the topic with a hard-hitting article which questions the current manner in which law schools in the United States are both accredited and ranked. The author recommends that the current system of accreditation be replaced by the creation of a National Association of Regional Law Schools.

On more familiar territory for the Digest, there are three articles relating to Clinical Legal Education. Bloch & Prasad contrast the developments relating to clinical legal education in India with the influence of the MacCrate Report on similar developments in the United States. Weinstein traces the outcomes of an empirical study involving the use of a live client clinic, whilst Baker reflects on the influence of a relatively newly named discipline called Therapeutic Jurisprudence (TJ) which is defined as an interdisciplinary focus on the process of law in a clinical setting.

Under Course Content, Cata Backer suggests a possible structure for analysis of the value of integrating the transnational element within the teaching, research and service of law school stakeholders. This includes a proposed set of framework structures for the incorporation of transnational elements in legal education.

The notion of transnational legal perspectives also has a focus under Individual Subjects. Siegel draws upon personal expertise teaching first-year constitutional law, by comparing the U.S. Supreme Court’s view of commandeering with that of the European Union and Germany. The author subsequently extends this comparison of constitutional structure to include individual rights.

On the same questioning basis, Corn under Individual Subjects/Areas of Law seeks the establishment of a Joint Service Law of War Academy to ensure that the United States complies with its obligations under the Law of Armed Conflict. Whilst acknowledging the efforts made by judge advocates general to the planning and execution of the Global War on Terrorism operations, the author is of the view that the contemporary operational environment demands a more sophisticated and structured approach to the current issues originally created by the abuses at Abu Ghraib in Iraq.

On the topic of Learning Styles, Christensen’s article describes an empirical study on how experts read the law. The author explains that this is an under-researched area of legal education, there having been only two previous empirical studies describing expert/novice reading in the legal domain.

The second article relating to Learning Styles is on the under-researched topic of students who begin law school having been diagnosed with a learning disability. Christensen describes a case study of three law students with attention deficit disorder (ADD). This is an important study which examines the problems faced by such students and the need for the law teacher to develop new teaching techniques to accommodate many different learning styles. The article embraces many of the other challenges faced by law schools when developing an approach by students who may have a learning disability, such as isolation in law school, multiple learning styles, teaching methodologies, and concerns about their future. The author states that by seeking to create an environment of inclusion versus exclusion, by an expansion of teaching methodologies and by recognising the multitude of talents and skills possessed by students, it is possible to humanise the law school experience for all students.

As Editor, I was fascinated to read in Pue’s contribution under Legal Ethics a reference to the United Kingdom’s Parliamentary 1846 Committee on Legal Education. In my view this is a much neglected Report in the context of the development of modern English legal education. In a thoughtful and questioning article the author questions whether this is the appropriate time to return to a form of legal education which embraces legal morality.

Postgraduate Programs includes an article by Colbran & Tynan which describes the establishment and effect of the Australian Law Postgraduate Network (ALPN), an important initiative whereby Australian Law Schools have introduced a co-operative approach to postgraduate legal research. This has involved the promotion of collaboration and leadership in the supervision of legal research across Australian law schools, with co-operation between supervisors and students undertaking postgraduate legal research degrees.

On the topic of Practical Experience, Feeley examines the complex topic of exploring the use of for-profit placements in law school externship programs and the issues which this raises in the United States context both with regard to ABA Standards and the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. The author makes a convincing argument for the circumstances when for-profit placements can be appropriate to help meet the needs and/or goals of the law school.

Globalisation is a focus under the heading of Professional Skills when Mitchell describes how to take a unique aspect of a foreign legal system (in this particular context, the Scottish criminal procedure) and incorporate it into exercises in an American trial advocacy course.

In pursuing logic for law students when being required to think like a lawyer, Aldisert, Clowney & Peterson have attempted to introduce the student to thinking in syllogisms, which they argue is a specific form of deductive reasoning lurking below the surface of most judicial opinions and briefs. This is rightly classified under Professional Skills and their argument is persuasive that a solid footing in logic will help students feel more secure when finding themselves in a complex doctrinal thicket.

With regard to Teaching Methods & Media, Rhee re-examines the Socratic method of teaching in the context of a paper by Pólya. The notion that the process of solving a problem is deductive is challenged by arguing that, contrary to conventional wisdom, the process of solving problems is inductive. Rhee draws the attention of the reader to the fact that, as a relatively new law teacher, this particular article was written in order to sort out the author’s own understanding of how to teach legal problem solving skills within a Socratic dialogue.