Zeugma

Signature pedagogies: how do they emerge?

Shulman’s ideas about signature pedagogy, which oddly enough didn’t have a high profile in the Future of Legal Education conference, still have me hooked.  They raise a central issue, namely the extent to which we are ruled by a learning outcomes model of education, and the whole technocracy and superstructure (in a Marxist sense) of a modern mass educational system.  Technology and superstructure, as Benjamin knew so well, are intimately linked.  Nor is it a matter of technology transforming superstructure.  Far from disrupting, revolutionizing, transforming the system, technology is all too often actively co-opted to support the pre-existing educational system and its manifestation as signature pedagogy.  More and more information, media, channel-switchings are available to us now via hardware / platforms such as photocopiers, the web, scanners, portable cassette players, mp3 players, smartpens, laptops, and the like.  Looking back on my own experience as a learner, not one of these technologies was available to me when I was an undergraduate student at Glasgow in 1974-78.  And yet how little has really changed in the superstructure.  Massification, yes.  Transformation, no.

The Future of Legal Education Conference: general response

This was a great conference, no doubt about it.  I talked to one participant who had already been to four Carnegie-related events since the publication of the book, and she said this one was the best to date.  It was international, drawing from at least ten different countries’ legal educational practice; it was broadly based in terms of theory and practice; it addressed the issue of transformation which in the wake of Carnegie and Best Practices is what is needed; it contained substantial theory and plenty of practical examples; and there was the opportunity to hear more about and join organisations such as the Global Alliance for Justice Education.  Clark Cunningham has done a great job in pulling it all together – there are few people who could have done it. 

The conference also addressed issues that the Carnegie report could perhaps have dealt with in more depth – the issue of diversity, for instance (eg the effect of the signature pedagogy on students of colour); leadership in these matters (deans were present, particularly in the Transforming Existing Law Schools section, though significantly enough no representation from Harvard [apart from Gene Koo from Berkman on technology], Stanford, even UCLA); international perspectives, and technology. In this respect it served to take Carnegie concepts and critiques into new areas of law school experience. 

At a more personal level, I was moved by the passion and commitment of the speakers – not just those on the floor, but in private conversations with almost everyone.  Some speakers were outstanding in this regard – John Berry, Legal Division Director of the Florida Bar, and Mary Lu Bilek, Associate Dean, CUNY, come to mind. We were all there for basically the same reasons, so I guess it was a highly selective grouping of people; but it was also a sceptical and knowledgeable grouping too, who were listening to each other closely, and finding new things at almost every session.  I found it humbling and inspirational to be here and listen to what was going on in different jurisdictions.  I’m taking a shopping list of approaches home with me – so much to read about, plan, and begin to think about implementing in legal education in Scotland.

The Future of Legal Education conference, day 3

Missed the first session of the final day's concurrent workshops because I was absorbed in a conversation with clinicians...  Something of a theme in this conference.  Looked interesting, too, because on the subject of the Carnegie report, and the speaker talked about Reed, one of the earlier Carnegie reporters on legal education. 

The Future of Legal Education, Day 2

Arrived late to the first session (talking to conference-goers), to find Kate Lauchland in full flow: funny, shrewd, accurate.  Eg on challenges: the God Professor who will not play nicely with others; dumping integrated components, failure to draw connections, time, avoiding lip service, more time...  She advised us to start small and build on success.  Make sure profession is aligned with changes being carried out.

The Future of Legal Education conference, GSU College of Law, Atlanta

I’m at The Future of Education conference in Atlanta GA by kind permission of Clark Cunningham, conference chair and organiser.  I’ll be blogging the conference on this blog over the next three days or so, posting when I get back to my hotel.