18 Legal Writing 85 (2012)
35 Pages Posted: 2 Jun 2011 Last revised: 11 Dec 2013
Date Written: December 5, 2013
This Article adds to the on-going discussion about the assessment of student learning outcomes in law schools. It addresses the assessment of first-year law students’ basic legal reading and reasoning skills, with a particular examination of students’ capacity to read closely related cases, detect indeterminacies of meaning among cases, and determine which similarities and distinctions are relevant in light of an assigned professional role or task. Following a detailed review of the prior research in this area, the paper reports the results of a study that employed pre- and post-test instruments to measure the impact of the traditional case-dialogue teaching methodology on students’ skills of legal reading and reasoning. The analysis of students’ normalized learning gains indicates that while some of the participating students realized an improvement in their reading and reasoning skills, the student population as a whole did not achieve substantial learning gains. This central finding is consistent with the findings from the prior studies in this area. The results across studies call for the development of teaching approaches other than the traditional case-dialogue method and for the continued assessment of learning gains.
Keywords: legal education, educational assessment, assessment, student learning outcomes, teaching, teaching outcomes, law students, methodology, case-dialog, Carnegie Report
JEL Classification: K19, I21
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Herring, David J. and Lynch, Collin, Teaching Skills of Legal Analysis: Does the Emperor Have Any Clothes? (December 5, 2013). 18 Legal Writing 85 (2012); UNM School of Law Research Paper 2013-09. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1856109 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1856109