Barker, D --- "From the Editor" [2009] LegEdDig 1; (2009) 17(1) Legal Education Digest 3

---

EDITORIAL

One of the many privileges of being the Editor of the Digest is that normally, after the researchers have completed their part of the task of digesting the selected articles, it is the Editor who has the first sight of these articles now in their digested form. There is a sense of excitement in reading on a regular basis accounts of innovation, experimentation, successes and sometimes even failures (but heroic failures!) of law academics who have attempted to stimulate their students and make their classes, whether lectures, seminars and tutorials, more interesting. It is always encouraging to know that the majority of law lecturers are constantly striving to enhance their students’ learning experience. It is also the hope of the Digest editorial staff that we are able to convey this enthusiasm by the authors of the digested articles to our readership.

The book selected for review in this edition is a reflection of the current discussions in many jurisdictions as to whether legal research should be a component of the core curriculum. Concise Legal Research, now jointly authored by Robert Watt, the original author, and Francis Johns, is into its 6^th edition. The book review reflects on the dramatic changes brought about by electronic methods of legal research during the sixteen years which have passed since the publication of the 1^st edition in 1993.

The first article by Sonsteng, Ward, Bruce and Petersen digested under the appropriate subject heading of Changes focuses on the need for a legal education renaissance. The authors argue that if their recommended reforms are not implemented, then other external forces, over which legal educators will have no control, will bring about change anyway. They recognise that whilst there are many limiting factors on reform such as tenure, academic freedom and certain vested interests, the primary responsibility is on the Deans of Faculty to give a lead to ensure that these necessary changes are brought about. Note: For the information of subscribers, this is the first part of a long article which has been divided into two parts. The second part is digested under the heading History (see below).

Cooperative Education incorporates the concerns of Fines relating to those aspects of legal education which the author regards as imposing unnecessary difficulties for the student in a contemporary law school environment. However whilst the article recognises the advances which have been made by the creation of two new significant Association of American Law School Sections, those of Academic Support and Balance in Legal Education, in creating a supportive environment for students, it censures the ongoing failure by many faculty members to abandon an overt competitive ethos.

There are two articles under the heading of Curriculum. In the first Kift, a highly regarded Australian legal educator, considers the varying demands made on legal education brought about by dynamic changes in modern legal practice. Whilst the article has an Australian focus there is a comparative element which, whilst commending a reorientation of the traditional approaches to legal education, regrets the lack of a positive approach to curriculum transformation. As with the Sonsteng et al article above, her conclusion contains a call for leadership to implement a new vision for a liberal legal education. Also within the category of Curriculum, Merlino, Richardson, Chamberlain and Springer review the necessity for law schools to adapt to the changing needs of their students, particularly within the area of science and technology. The article contains the outcomes of a survey on science education opportunities and a list of those Law Institutions which offer courses in science education.

Under Future Chesterman asks the question as to whether a law degree should be regarded as a technical qualification or a serious field of intellectual inquiry. The author recognises that how this question is answered will have a major implication on the way one teaches in a law school. The author’s view is that changes in legal education are increasingly driven by the demands of the legal profession, the mobility of the student population and a changing intellectual shift by those studying law.

History is a topic which is enjoying a resurgence within legal education and the article by Sonsteng, Ward, Bruce and Petersen not only contains a review of the History of American Legal Education, but places it directly within the context of legal education as taught in the United States today.

The often artificial distinction as to under which particular heading an article should be placed does sometimes create a dilemma for the staff of the Digest. The categorisation of the article relating to the juxtaposition of academic integrity education within a business law course by McGill caused such a question to be asked. However the view was that it belonged under Individual Subjects. The author advances the premise that there are few topics in a business law course which cannot be adapted to include academic integrity. However the article does not argue that this premise should be followed in the teaching of a business law course but rather that two additional legal topics should be selected in such a program, with one comprising a procedural academic misconduct enforcement component and the other being an emphasis on a substantive academic misconduct code of conduct.

Legal Ethics is deemed appropriate for another article relating to business law courses. In this article by Leib and Weber it is argued that there is a unique responsibility placed on business schools as to their duty towards ensuring that their students’ ethical awareness and ethical reasoning skills are integrated with their understanding of core ethical principles. The authors believe that the challenge for enshrining these principles in business law courses is discovering which tools and techniques are available to encourage the student to move from passivity to active learning.

Minority Groups forms the basis for the Digest breaking its rule of stating the title of an article in its editorial. There is no doubt that Sommerlad’s ‘What are you doing here? You should be working in a hair salon or something’ draws the attention of the reader to the deeply entrenched traditionalism of the solicitors’ profession within England and Wales. The attempts to remedy this form of discrimination are described in the article particularly with regard to the outcomes of a Training Framework Review conducted among students and trainee solicitors.

The recognition of the growing importance of legislation and its integration within the Harvard Law School ‘s first year curricula reform process as a freestanding ‘Legislation and Regulation’ course is described by Leib under Subjects. The justification for this reform to the curriculum includes Guido Clabresi’s argument for ‘stratutorification’ of American law and the instilling of respect for methodological pluralism about law. Also under this heading is Tan’s appeal for the acknowledgement of the value of a good philosophy course in enabling the law student not only to examine the value of law and the ideals of the legal system but to also question its legitimacy.

Teaching Methods and Media is the final heading in this edition and includes two articles. The first by Horan and Taylor-Sands describes the problems of engaging students in mediation as a vital part of the process of civil litigation. The article contains a description of the various methods of visual and verbal learning styles to communicate with students, including a multimedia project entitled ‘Litigation in Action’ described by the authors as an attempt to bridge the gap between formal learning and the court/mediation room environment. As a direct contrast to the various learning methods examined in this article, Wilson returns to the basics of the tutorial as the main forum whereby students are able to engage and interact with their tutors and he reviews the various ways in which tutors approach their conduct of their tutorials. This is an invaluable examination of tutorials which still constitute the major form of teaching used by law schools in the teaching and learning process.

Emeritus Professor David Barker AM

Editor