Huddersfield's
Electronically- Delivered PgDL (CPE) Course, Part
Two
John Fairhurst
PgDL(CPE) Course Director
Department of Law
University of Huddersfield
[email protected]
Abstract
The University of Huddersfield is
the only institution to have been validated by the CPE Board to
deliver the Postgraduate Diploma in Law (Common Professional
Examination) course for delivery by distance learning, using the
Internet as the principal method of delivery. The course came
on-stream for the 1998/99 academic year .
The previous JILT
article in October 1999, consisted of a
detailed evaluation of the course following its first year of
delivery. This is a follow-up article consisting of an evaluation
of the course following the conclusion of the 1999/2000 academic
year. It is more comprehensive given the fact there were students
on both years of the course, and July 2000 witnessed the first
graduates. The article offers an insight into the future of
electronically delivered law courses at both postgraduate and
undergraduate level.
Keywords: Course Evaluation, Legal Education, CPE, CPE Board,
Distance Learning, Electronic Delivery, Computer-based Learning,
Collaborative Learning, Pedagogy, Online Law Libraries, Blackboard
CourseInfo.
This is a Refereed
article published on 31 October 2000.
Citation: Fairhurst
J, 'Huddersfield's Electronically-delivered PgDL (CPE) Course, Part
Two', 2000
(3) The Journal of Information, Law
and Technology (JILT).
<http://elj.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/00-3/fairhurst.html/>. New
citation as at 1/1/04:
<http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/jilt/2000_3/fairhurst/>
1. Introduction
The Department of Law at the
University of Huddersfield has recently completed its second year
of delivering the Postgraduate Diploma in Law (Common Professional
Examination) course electronically, over the Internet. This article
is a follow-up to that which appeared in JILT last year ( Fairhurst 1999 );
the article consisted of a detailed evaluation of the course at the
end of its first year of delivery. Readers are referred to
this previous article for
general background information relating to the nature of the course
and the delivery mechanism.
1.1 Conclusions: 1998/99 academic
year
The 1999 JILT article ( Fairhurst 1999 , pp.23-30) made, inter
alia , the following recommendations (based upon the summarised
conclusions below) for a subsequent evaluation of the course, which
shall form the subject matter of this article:
1.1.1 Retention
rate/assessment
What are the Year One and Year
Two 1999/2000 retention rates and assessment results, compared to
those on the conventional part-time course?
Retention rate
The retention rate of students on
the 1998/99 course appeared to be statistically poor. Of the 13
students who initially enrolled on the course in September 1998,
only eight (61.5%) completed the academic year. However, the
withdrawals were all for reasons which made future participation on
the course difficult, if not impossible.
Assessment
Of the eight students who completed
the 1998/99 academic year, seven entered the final examinations.
The pass rate was 100%, which was greater than that for students on
the conventional part-time course. The average mark in each of the
four subjects studied was likewise greater than that of students on
the conventional part-time course. Two underlying factors were
highlighted which could have had an influence on this
data:
Firstly, the requirement that
distance learning students regularly submitted tutorial work should
have ensured that they covered the whole syllabus and that any
mistakes or misconceptions were rectified in the tutor's feedback
(this was not a requirement for students on the conventional
part-time course). However there is a caveat to this in that, in
practice, six of the eight distance learning students who completed
the year soon began to fall behind with tutorial submission and
some of the later tutorials were not submitted.
Secondly, the academic
qualifications of the distance learning students were generally
higher than those of the conventional part-time students, and
therefore the distance learning students could be considered to be
academically stronger; this underlying factor may have had a
significant effect on the data.
Nevertheless, a 100% pass rate in
the first year of operation was indicative of the fact that the
distance learning course was educationally successful.
1.1.2 Interaction and collaborative student
learning
Has the new learning
environment ( Blackboard
CourseInfo ) resulted in student interactivity and collaborative
learning?
During the first year of the
course, the Internet-based learning environment was basic but
functional. One of the conclusions of my article ( Fairhurst 1999 , pp. 24-26) was that the
absence of live chat rooms hindered the ability of facilitating and
actually achieving collaborative student learning. The learning
environment incorporated asynchronous email discussion groups, but
these were generally not being used by the students. For the start
of the 2000/2001 academic year, the University purchased a
sophisticated software package, Blackboard
CourseInfo , which incorporates
discussion boards and chat rooms (see Appendix for an illustration of the Blackboard learning
environment). There is also a facility to place students in smaller
learning groups with their own private discussion board, chat room
and document-sharing facility.
1.1.3 Tutors' delivery
time
How has this changed in the
1999/2000 academic year compared to the 1998/99 academic
year?
Have outline answers reduced
the volume of feedback?
If collaborative student
learning is now taking place, has this affected the need for
detailed feedback?
The previous article ( Fairhurst 1999 , pp.26-27) indicated that the
number of staff-hours required to successfully deliver the distance
learning course during the 1998/99 academic year was high in
comparison to the conventional part-time course. Distance learning
students were required to submit an average of two tutorials each
week for marking and feedback. This constituted the most
time-consuming activity for staff and was regarded by tutors as
being akin to a one-to-one tutorial. Quite often students were
making common mistakes and therefore it was suggested that outline
answers could significantly decrease the laborious task of tutors
having to repeat feedback. It was also suggested that if the email
discussion group could be successfully incorporated into the
students' learning activities, so that students were beginning to
learn from one another, the necessity for individualised tutorial
marking and feedback could be reduced.
1.1.4 Face-to-face
tuition
Have the views of students
during the 1999/2000 academic year changed with regard to the
compulsory nature of the sessions?
The CPE Board externally validates
the course. The Board is made up of personnel from the two
professional bodies (The Law Society and The General Council of the
Bar), practitioners from the two branches of the legal profession
(solicitors and barristers) and academics. The CPE Board stipulates
that students have to attend a minimum of twelve face-to-face
tuition days each academic year. Students on the first year of the
course in 1998/99 almost unanimously recorded the view that the
sessions should remain as a compulsory element of the course, and
that even if they were optional they would attend.
The sessions proved educationally
rewarding for students. However, the compulsory nature of the
tuition deterred the recruitment of overseas students. It is also
at odds with the Department's rationale for introducing this mode
in the first place: flexibility for those in full-time employment;
with family commitments; with a disability etc.
This article is an evaluation of
the course, following the end of its second year of delivery; the
evaluation is based primarily upon a consideration of the above
issues (sections 1.1.1 to 1.1.4). Although pedagogical issues
permeate throughout this article, substantive pedagogical
discussion is reserved to section 3 (on collaborative student
learning) and 5.2.3 (when discussing the pedagogical rationale for
compulsory face-to-face tuition).
2.
Retention rate/assessment 1999/2000
2.1 Retention rate
2.1.1 Year One
Twenty students were recruited onto
Year One of the distance learning course, compared to 13 on the
conventional part-time course. Of the distance learning students,
two withdrew and four deferred their studies to the 2000/01
academic year, representing a 70% retention rate (increasing to
87.5% if the deferrals are excluded from the statistics). Of the 13
part-time students, three withdrew during the year, which equates
to a 76.9% retention rate.
This can be compared to the 1998/99
retention rates of 61.5% (increasing to 69.2% if the one student
who deferred his studies until the 1999/2000 academic year is
excluded) for the distance learning course, and 92.9% for the
part-time course.
It would appear that the distance
learning course can expect to have a greater number of students
withdrawing during the academic year, compared to those on the
conventional part-time course. The distance learning course, with
the requirement that students submit an average of two tutorials
each week for marking and feedback, starts off at a fast,
undiminishing, tempo. Students who fall behind during the first
week are playing catch-up and the pressure this creates would
appear to result in them either withdrawing from the course or
deferring their studies. One of the two students who withdrew,
along with three of the four who deferred, were all lagging behind
with their tutorial submissions from the first stages of the
course. These four had been recruited onto the course the week
before it commenced. Preliminary reading and the completion of
written exercises on the English Legal System (which is estimated
to take about 80 hours to complete) had to be undertaken prior to
the course's commencement. It was unlikely that those students
recruited onto the course the week before its start date would have
had sufficient time to complete this work, and therefore they were
faced with the dual burden of completing their preliminary work as
well as submitting tutorials for the substantive
subjects.
The remaining one student who
withdrew was one of the most academically gifted. However, a move
abroad and an increased workload within his new employment resulted
in his decision to leave the course. The other student deferring
his studies to the 2000/01 academic year did so because of work and
family commitments; his tutorial submissions became less frequent
and he was counselled into deferring his studies.
As stated in the previous article
( Fairhurst 1999 p.23), the superior
retention rate for the part-time course could be due to the fact
that students could attend classes without having prepared for
tutorials. In addition the part-time course starts at a less
frenetic pace, thus providing students with a settling-in
period.
For the 2000/01 academic year it
has been decided to have a cut-off point two weeks before the
course begins for the recruitment of students onto the distance
learning course. This will ensure that students have sufficient
time available to have completed their preliminary work, thus
enabling them to concentrate solely on the substantive
subjects.
2.1.2 Year Two
In Year Two of the course, all
seven distance learning students and all ten part-time students
continued through to their final assessments. This is par for the
course on the PgDL (CPE); it is rare for students who proceed to
Year Two to subsequently withdraw.
2.2 Assessment
2.2.1 Year One
Distance
learning
Of the 14 students who proceeded to
their final examinations in the summer, nine passed and will
proceed to Year Two, three failed, one failed by default (because
he did not attend the exams) and one deferred his exams to the
following academic year. If the student who failed by default and
the one who deferred are excluded, this represents a 75% pass rate;
down from the 100% pass rate the previous year.
Subject-to-subject, the average
marks were: Contract Law 55.25%; Criminal Law 50.33%; EC Law
58.42%; and Public Law 57.67%. Two of the twelve students are on
course for a distinction (average of 70% ), with a further five on
course for a commendation (average of 60% ).
Conventional
part-time
Of the ten students who proceeded
to their final examinations in the summer, eight passed and will
proceed to Year Two, one failed and one deferred his exams to the
August resits. If the deferred student is excluded from the
statistics, this represents an 88.9% pass rate.
Subject-to-subject, the average
marks were: Contract Law 56.33%; Criminal Law 51.22%; EC Law
52.44%; and Public Law 56%. Five of the nine students are on course
for a commendation (average of 60% ).
Distance learning v.
conventional part-time
The overall average mark for the
distance learning students was 55.42% compared to 54% for the
part-time students. Although there have been some failures, the
fact that a majority of students on the distance learning course
are on target for commendations (with two distinctions a
possibility) is indicative of the fact that the course is achieving
its educational objectives.
2.2.2 Year Two
Distance
learning
Of the seven students who sat the
final examinations, six passed and one was referred in his Land
exam, representing an 85.7% success rate. Of the six students who
passed, three were awarded commendations having achieved an average
of 60% .
Subject-to-subject, the average
marks were: Equity and Trusts 48.86%; Land Law 49.71%; Torts
52.57%. Students also had to complete a research project during
their second year; the average mark was 64.43%.
Conventional
part-time
Of the ten students who sat the
final examinations, three students passed, three were referred in
one subject, one failed all three exams, and three had their exams
deferred due to extenuating circumstances. Excluding the deferred
candidates, this represents a 42.9% success rate. No commendations
were awarded.
Subject-to-subject, the average
marks were: Equity and Trusts 42.71%; Land Law 49%; Torts 48.57%.
The average mark for the research project was 58.43%.
Distance learning v.
conventional part-time
Previously (Fairhurst, 1999, p.23),
the weak academic ability of the conventional part-time cohort of
students was highlighted. This has undoubtedly been reflected in
their final results. The overall average mark for the distance
learning students (over the two years of the course) was 55.86%,
compared to 53% for the part-time students.
3.
Collaborative student learning 1999/2000
While the statistics discussed
above in section 2 set the scene for the course in terms of
retention and success rates, it does little to add to the growing
academic debate about the implementation of technology for
teaching; what works and what does not? Academics the world over
are divided as to the extent to which technology can be
incorporated within education, in particular the extent to which an
entire course can be delivered online (see, for example, University of Illinois Report
1999 ).
Suitability of a course for online
delivery can depend upon the course and the student body. The
University of Illinois ( Report,1999 , p.2)
has recognised that 'traditional' undergraduate students benefit
from '... the maturing, socialising component of an undergraduate
college education and this requires on-campus presence.' This is
further elaborated on (at p.41):
'Perhaps the most risky wholly
online context is the offering of whole degrees in undergraduate
education. While this mode might be justified for some place-bound
students, online interconnectivity, as good as it can be, still
cannot replace the human interactions of in-class, in-the-hallways,
and in-the-pub situations.'
In contrast, the Report states (at
p.21) that postgraduate students 'have already gained a great deal
of socialisation through their first degree, and less of this is
needed ...'
The PgDL (CPE) course is
postgraduate in nature and therefore is prima facie
suitable for online delivery.
Feenberg ( 1999b , p.1) has referred to Plato's
denunciation of the written medium because of its failure to
recreate the spontaneity of oral dialogue. The pedagogical merits
of engaging in dialogue between students, and between tutors and
students is well documented (see, for example, Chickering and Gamson,
1987 ). In Plato's view ( Plato, 1961 ), the written manuscript could not
instruct a student who misunderstood its message, because of the
passive form of the medium. As Feenberg ( 1999b , p.2) stated:
'Plato holds that the technology of
writing has the power to destroy the dialogic relationship which
ought to occur between teacher and student. As he sees it, the
medium in which we communicate determines the quality of our
interactions. But this is a deeply flawed view, as many
contemporary scholars have argued. Rather, the social impact of
technology depends on how it is designed and
used . Writing can lend itself to ongoing dialogues between
teachers and students, and speech can easily become
one-sided.'
Plato was speaking in 1961, when
the use of technology within education was light years away from
what it is today, and therefore it is perhaps not surprising that
he held such views as to the passivity of the written medium. It is
accepted that in 1961 traditional correspondence courses provided
for tutors to provide written feedback to students via snail mail,
but Feenberg's rejection of Plato's views is probably harsh when
placed in its historical context and in particularly given the fact
that Feenberg ( 1999b , p.1) went on to
state:
'There is something about dialogue,
and the active involvement of the teacher, that is fundamental to
the educational process ...'
Technology was not sufficiently
advanced in 1961 to incorporate synchronous written dialogue
(through chat rooms) between tutor and student, or indeed between
students; it was not even possible to engage in asynchronous
written dialogue through discussion boards. Therefore
pedagogically, Plato's rejection of the technology of writing would
legitimately have carried some weight in 1961, but not now.
Feenberg ( 1999b , p.1) himself accepted
that dialogue had to be 'woven into the design of any new
instructional tool'.
In a kind of implicit approval of
Plato's views, Feenberg ( 1999b p.4)
castigates the traditional correspondence courses because of the
student's isolation:
'... the Internet can do more than
merely improve the traditional correspondence course; it can also
be used to add human contact to an educational model that has
always been relatively impersonal. Using email and computer
conferencing, groups of students can be assembled in online
communities where they can participate in classroom discussion with
teachers on a regular basis.'
Feenberg ( 1999b , p.5) stated that in reliance on the
current base of experience with interactive forms of online
education: '...the evidence seems clear, at least to those who have
tried it: written dialogue works.' He acknowledges that written
dialogue is not the same as face-to-face interaction but he
concludes that the former has advantages over the
latter.
Jones R et al ( 1998 ) conducted a review on whether or not
Computer Mediated Communication could provide the basis for
collaborative learning on the Internet, and noted that conventional
face-to-face tutorials could be dominated by students of higher
ability to the detriment of students of lower ability, even if the
aim of the tutorial is to support collaborative learning.
Similarly, other factors could inhibit a student to involve
themselves in a face-to-face discussion, e.g. age, sex, ethnicity,
social class. They concluded that an electronic learning
environment, which incorporated discussion boards and chat rooms,
could assist in alleviating this domination and neutralising the
other factors.
With regard to tutor/student
dialogue, Chickering and Ehrmann ( 1997 ,
pp.1-2) stated:
'Communication technologies ... can
strengthen faculty interactions with all students, but especially
with shy students who are reluctant to ask questions or challenge
the teacher directly. It is often easier to discuss values and
personal concerns in writing than orally, since inadvertent or
ambiguous non-verbal signals are not so dominant ... electronic
mail, computer conferencing, and the World Wide Web increase
opportunities for students and faculty to converse and exchange
work much more speedily than before, and more thoughtfully and
'safely' than when confronting each other in a classroom or faculty
office ... with the new media, participation and contribution from
diverse students become more equitable and widespread.'
Feenberg ( 1999a , p.2) has noted that online
discussions can provide a richer and deeper dialogue when compared
to face-to-face interaction. Commenting upon his involvement with
an online course at the Western Behavioural Sciences
Institute:
'There the virtual classroom was a
place of intense intellectual and human interaction. Literally
hundreds of highly intelligent comments were contributed to our
computer conferences each month by both students and teachers. The
quality of these online discussions surpasses anything I have been
able to stimulate in my face-to-face classroom.'
The great advantage the
electronically delivered course has over its traditional
correspondence counterpart is the ability to engage in
collaborative learning between students, and tutors/students.
However, my evaluation of the first year of delivering the distance
learning course electronically ( Fairhurst,
1999 , pp.24-26) indicated that collaborative student learning
was not being achieved. During the 1998/99 academic year, the
learning environment only incorporated email discussion groups,
rather than live chat rooms. The small number of students who
completed the academic year (eight) were usually working on
different tutorials at different times, thus militating against the
possibility of engaging students in a meaningful dialogue.
Therefore although the discussion groups were being used with
enthusiasm in the first few weeks of the academic year, this came
to a sudden halt after the fourth week and no further contributions
were made during the remainder of the academic year.
The Blackboard CourseInfo learning
environment, which was online for the 1999/2000 academic year,
incorporates discussion boards, chat rooms and group work
facilities. It is perhaps not surprising that the Year Two students
did not make use of the facilities, given that they had become
acclimatised to working individually rather than
collectively.
However the Year One students had
similar collaborative learning experiences (or a lack of such
experiences) as the original class of 1998/99.
Fourteen Year One students
proceeded to their final summer examinations compared to eight in
1998/99. The problem of students working on different tutorials at
different times should therefore have been less problematic.
However, a similar pattern emerged by about the sixth week. Only
four students were regularly submitting their tutorials on
schedule, the remainder submitting them late, with a small minority
failing to submit.
In their end-of-year
questionnaires, student responses on use of the discussion board
varied, but typical replies to the question of whether they found
the contributions of other students useful were:
'Useful only for the first few
weeks, then contributions tailed off.'
'Useful but limited - use of
discussion groups died out early on ...'
One student recognised the
importance of the facility, by commenting:
'On a distance learning course this
is the only way to really communicate with others - helps you to
feel that you're not on your own.'
In reply to the question on whether
they found making contributions and replying to other students'
contributions a useful exercise, a typical response was:
'It was a useful exercise in
stimulating interest and seeing the relevance of the
materials.'
A similar response to use of the
chat rooms was evident. In reply to the question whether they made
use of the chat room, one student replied:
'Ultimately, though this is a
useful resource, the problem is being able to guarantee that you
will be online at a given date and time.'
This student went further, and
suggested that in order to fully incorporate the facility into
delivery of the course:
'Perhaps use could be made
mandatory - but with students able to elect between two or three
sessions. A difficult issue this, because open learning and the
synchronised requirement of chat are mutually conflicting
ideas.'
The PgDL (CPE) course is generally
recognised as being an intensive and demanding course; one student
commented on the 'killer workload'. The intensive nature of the
course could therefore militate against students finding the time
to use the discussion boards and chat rooms, particularly when they
are given no direction by their tutors. That said, one group of
four students formed their own study group for Criminal Law, and
made use of their own private discussion board and chat room. They
had all found Criminal Law particularly difficult and therefore
sought to engage in a dialogue to assist their study. This activity
was student-led and all four commented favourably on being a member
of this learning group.
Following discussions with the
students, the reason for the difficulty with Criminal Law appeared
to be rooted in the tutor's desire that students develop a deep
understanding of the subject from the outset. This is highly
commendable, but given that this is a very intensive course, it is
arguable that students need a certain amount of initial 'spoon
feeding', before being academically stretched.
It was argued above that Plato's
view that written dialogue was inferior to oral dialogue was
perfectly justifiable at the time he expressed it ( 1961 ). However, provided there is written
dialogue between the students, and tutor/students, Plato's view
could be disregarded. On the PgDL (CPE) course this dialogue was
not taking place, at least not until students submitted a tutorial
to the tutor for marking and feedback. Therefore in a subject where
they did not receive the initial 'spoon feeding', difficulties
could arise. Although there was the facility to email the tutor for
assistance prior to submitting a tutorial, students were generally
completing the tutorial at the weekend prior to the Monday
submission date when the tutor would not be available. Therefore,
no dialogue would take place between tutor and student, and there
was little or no activity within the discussion board and chat
room. Once this group of students engaged in collaborative learning
with one another their understanding and enjoyment of the Criminal
Law increased.
On this course, the aim of the
discussion boards and chat rooms is to facilitate
collaborative learning between students (rather than to engage in
tutor/student dialogue). However, it is arguable that it is
necessary for the tutor to be actively involved initially in the
activities in order to ensure that collaborative learning is
achieved . Once students have familiarised themselves with
using the discussion boards and chat rooms, the tutor's presence
could be less dominant. Bearing in mind what has been discussed
above it might be preferable, on pedagogical grounds, for the tutor
to be involved in the dialogue at all times.
Where the sole aim is to achieve
student dialogue, tutor involvement has been recognised as a
pre-requisite to achieving collaborative student learning by
Grantham ( 2000 ), who has stated
that, in the context of discussion boards:
'I had to work quite hard to get
students to make initial postings to the electronic legal forum.
However, once they had made that all important first step, most of
them contributed quite freely ... It is the tutor's role to lead
them forward, to be alive to the need for gentle persuasion and to
the timing of electronic interventions.'
Herberger et al ( 1998 , p.9) have investigated the use of the
Internet to support collaborative student learning in legal
education. This requirement was also noted by them:
'To keep the motivation high, the
communication factor has to be emphasised and interaction has to be
integrated into the didactic concept as a key factor for a
successful on-line course ... To ensure effective organisation, a
kind of 'on-line presence' is required - all the more because the
asynchronous character of this type of exchange makes communication
harder.'
With the prospect of thirty-plus
students for Year One of the 2000/2001 course, it has been decided
to be more pro-active in promoting use of the discussion boards and
chat rooms. In some subjects, students will be required to make a
number of contributions, rather than submitting a tutorial. The
'reward' for making contributions will be the provision of an
outline tutorial answer prepared by the tutor. The tutor will also
direct the dialogue and review student contributions, as
appropriate.
Already this is proving successful.
While studying the first Public Law unit, students were requested
to make a contribution to the discussion board on issues relating
to the Home Secretary's tariff setting powers in relation to
criminals sentenced to life imprisonment, whether this conflicted
with the doctrine of the separation of powers and what impact, if
any, the Human Rights Act 1998 might have on such powers. Nearly
all students made a contribution, and the academic level of the
discussion was high.
4.
Tutors' delivery time - 1999/2000
During the 1998/99 academic year,
the Contract Law and Criminal Law tutors observed that the time
they were engaged marking tutorials and providing students with
feedback was quite extensive when compared to the delivery time
associated with the conventional part-time course.
However, it has to be recognised
that the incorporation of electronic delivery should not be linked
to cost-saving. The University of Illinois Report ( 1999 , pp.50-51) states that:
'The scenario of hundreds of
thousands of students enrolling in a well developed, essentially
instructor-free online course does not appear realistic, and
efforts to do so will result in wasted time, effort, and expense
... Online teaching has said to be a shift from 'efficiency' to
'quality', and quality usually doesn't come cheaply. Sound online
instruction is not likely to cost less than traditional
instruction.'
During the 1999/2000 academic year
the tutors for Criminal Law and Land Law provided students with
outline tutorial answers; this was also undertaken selectively for
EC Law and Public Law. Where outline answers had been provided the
experience of tutors was that this significantly reduced the
requirement for extensive individual feedback, with a resultant
decrease in time expended on course delivery.
The provision of outline answers
was received favourably by students. From their end-of-year
questionnaires the following comments were made:
Land Law (Year Two
subject):
'The model answers were
excellent.'
'Model answers sent in response to
tutorials were very helpful and comprehensive.'
'Excellent suggested solutions
given for each tutorial - really comprehensive and
helpful.'
'The suggested answers were very
useful - good for aiding revision as well.'
This can be compared with one
student's observation in relation to Equity and Trusts (also a Year
Two subject), where outline tutorial answers were not
provided:
'Feedback was patchy: often very
good but often not sufficiently comprehensive (a 'model' answer to
each question would have been useful).'
Similar comments were received from
students in relation to those Year One subjects where outline
answers were provided. However, one student complained that
he:
'Only received outline answers for
around half the tutorials [for Public Law]'
The experience of providing
students with outline answers has been positive for both tutor and
student; it undoubtedly should be extended to the other
subjects.
5.
Face-to-face tuition 1999-2000
Students on the first year of the
course in 1998/99 almost unanimously recorded the view that the
face-to-face sessions should remain as a compulsory element of the
course, and that even if they were optional they would have
attended. The opinion of this cohort of students had not changed at
the end of their second year (and completion of the
course).
However the views of the 1999/2000
Year One intake were divided equally between those who thought they
should be compulsory from those who thought they should be
optional. Of those who thought they should be compulsory, all
agreed that even if they had been optional they would have attended
every session. Of those who thought they should be optional, only
one student stated that he would have attended all the sessions had
they been optional. Nevertheless, all the students were satisfied
with the study sessions; a majority rated them as 'very
good'.
Although the sessions proved
educationally rewarding for students, it has to be questioned
whether they should be a compulsory feature of the course. As
stated previously (section 1.1.4 above), the compulsory nature of
the tuition deters the recruitment of overseas students. It is also
at odds with the Department's rationale for introducing this mode
in the first place: flexibility for those in full-time employment;
with family commitments; with a disability etc.
The rationale for the CPE Board's
requirement that distance learning students attend the providing
institution for twelve days of face-to-face tuition each year is
three-fold:
5.1 Development of interpersonal
skills
The CPE Board acknowledges that the
aim of the CPE is to satisfy the academic stage of training, which
includes the development of legal research skills; the development
of interpersonal skills are incorporated within the vocational
stage of training (i.e. Legal Practice Course or Bar Vocational
Course).
The professional bodies do not have
a blanket policy requiring compulsory attendance for undergraduate
law programmes. CPE students are either graduates from the UK or
Ireland, or have satisfied the professional bodies as to their
academic ability at graduate level, and could therefore be presumed
to have a more developed level of interpersonal skills than their
undergraduate counterparts.
There would not appear to be a
clear link between the requirement for compulsory attendance and
the development of interpersonal skills.
5.2 Library access
In order to encourage a deeper
understanding of the core subjects, and to develop their legal
research skills, it is essential that students have access to
primary and secondary sources of law. However, it is becoming
increasingly rare nowadays for distance learning students to use
the on-campus library of the providing institution.
Three recent developments militate
against the necessity to use the providing institution's on-campus
library:
5.2.1 UK Library Plus
Scheme
At the start of the 1999/2000
academic year, 58 higher education institutions in the UK
participated in a new initiative enabling, inter alia ,
distance learning students to borrow from on-campus libraries in
close proximity from where they live or work; as previously they
can also gain admission for research purposes.
Users of the scheme apply to their
home library for up to three vouchers which can be exchanged for a
borrower's card from participating libraries.
5.2.2 Online libraries
The vast majority of CPE course
providers have developed online libraries which students can access
over the Internet from anywhere in the world. The list of resources
currently available online is endless, but could
include:
In addition, there is a large
volume of legal resources freely available on the Internet: e.g.
House of Lords, Court of Appeal and Employment Tribunal judgments;
Acts of Parliament and Statutory Instruments; ECJ judgments and
Advocate General opinions; Journal of Current Legal
Issues.
A press release on 16 March
2000[ 1 ], by David Lock MP, LCD
Minister with responsibility for IT issues, stated:
'There is a powerful case for
making basic raw materials of the law, legislation and case law,
much more widely and easily accessible to the public and legal
professions, through the use of information technology.'
He was speaking after viewing a
pilot website BAILII (British and Irish
Legal Information Institute), following its launch in March 2000.
BAILII offers free Internet access to primary legal materials.
Having viewed the site, Mr Lock stated:
'The Government strongly endorses
the pilot website which will provide a valuable opportunity to test
how this kind of service should be developed and maintained in the
future. I hope that those who use it will take the opportunity to
provide as much feedback as possible. In the longer term I
anticipate that the development of a requirement for the future
delivery of online legal sources will be undertaken as part of the
programme of work under our civil justice initiative, which will be
announced in the summer [2000].'
There could be no clearer signal of
the Government's commitment to free online legal resources. The
LCD's strategy paper civil.justice.2000: 'A vision of the Civil
Justice System in the Information Age', was subsequently published
on 27 June 2000 and explores how the enormous potential offered by
developing technologies can be harnessed for the benefit of users
of the civil justice system[ 2 ].
Albeit, we have a long way to go before being anywhere near equal
to the Australasian Legal Information Institute ( AustLII ),which operates one
of the largest free law sites on the web, but it is a start in the
right direction[ 3 ].
The necessity for a student having
access to legal resources cannot be underestimated, but requiring
students to attend twelve days of tuition at the providing
institution, in order that they might avail themselves of the
on-campus library facilities, might not be appropriate in the
electronic age. The number of persons with access to the Internet
is growing daily; no longer do the vast majority of Internet
Service Providers charge a monthly fee for using their service. The
financial cost for students in accessing the Internet will
therefore be limited to the cost of a local telephone call; some
providers now offer all-in packages, which includes the cost of
telephone calls.
5.2.3 Pedagogical
considerations
Pedagogy - taxonomy of teaching
activities
In designing and delivering a
distance learning programme, the relevant pedagogical issues centre
around categories of teaching activity [ 4 ]. On a conventional
course, academics are familiar with dividing their teaching into
lectures, tutorials, seminars, workshops etc. However, lectures,
tutorials etc. are not categories of teaching activity and
it is necessary to break them down into such categories.
There are many different taxonomies
of educational objectives which are used to distinguish categories
of teaching activity. There is no such thing as a correct
taxonomy; no taxonomy could truthfully claim to cover everything. A
taxonomy might include the following (but not necessarily in this
order):
-
Orientation - providing a structure
for learning
-
Delivery - presentation of
materials
-
Elaboration - clarification based
on student needs
-
Feedback - individual assessment
and elaboration
-
Diagnosis - assessment for
grading
-
Evaluation - assessment for
remediation
-
Motivation - justification of the
activity
-
Pedagogy - electronic
delivery.
This section seeks to illustrate
how these teaching activities can be incorporated into an
electronically-delivered distance learning PgDL (CPE) course,
without the necessity of face-to-face tuition; the discussion is
not specific to Huddersfield's course. This could also apply to a
hybrid model of delivery (i.e. traditional and electronic
combined).
Structure
A user-friendly electronic learning
environment, and a clearly structured programme (e.g. each
substantive subject divided into study Units with start and end
dates for the completion of each Unit) will provide students with
the necessary orientation to complete the course to the
best of their ability and retain their motivation .
Motivation is a recurring theme throughout this section.
Student
materials
It is possible to incorporate a
variety of different media into the delivery of student
materials:
Appropriate use of different media
can have a positive impact upon a student's motivation ,
however bandwidth problems can make the incorporation of video
problematic.
Online tests
Another motivational
influence is to build in plenty of activities into the
delivery of the student materials.
The incorporation of Multiple
Choice Questions can provide students with more interactivity (and
therefore aid their motivation ), and current software
packages provide the option of creating automatic student
feedback whenever a wrong answer is
selected.
Online library and
weblinks
As discussed above (at section
5.2.2), online libraries and weblinks can add to the student's
knowledge base, lead to a deeper learning of the subject matter and
increase their motivation .
Tutor support and Tutor Marked
Assessments
It is possible to incorporate a
facility to enable students to email the tutor for individual
guidance where they have problems with the student materials (which
would include the online tests), thus providing the student with
elaboration .
TMAs (i.e. Tutor Marked
Assessments; a formative assessment) are the ideal way to provide
students with individual feedback . The equivalence of a
TMA is a one-to-one tutorial. This feedback will enable the student
to know where they have gone wrong and what needs to be done to
rectify the situation ( evaluation ). The TMA can be graded
or ungraded; if it is graded then it satisfies the
diagnosis activity, otherwise the formal coursework
element (a summative assessment) would step into the
breach.
Tutor support and TMAs are an
important component in providing motivation . The Illinois
Report ( 1995 , pp.25-26) states that tutor
'attentiveness' plays a key role in motivating
students:
'If a finger can be placed on the
'human touch' of teaching, the role of attentiveness in motivating
the student could well be it. As we now consider the pedagogy of
online instruction, this is a key element that must be kept in the
translation, at least for the great many students who need
motivation from the instructor. Not only must professors provide
teaching over the Internet; they must also be in contact with
students to assess learning.'
Collaborative student
learning
Student interactivity can be
incorporated using discussion board (asynchronous communication)
and chat room (synchronous communication) features, both of which
can promote collaborative student learning (as discussed in section
3 above).
Incorporating discussion board
and/or chat room features will undoubtedly motivate
students. If there is tutor participation this can satisfy the
evaluation and feedback activities.
Some electronic learning
environments enable students to work in groups, with their own
private discussion boards and chat rooms. They could then work on
individual tutorials in smaller groups and submit a joint effort
for marking and feedback.
All of the teaching activities can
be incorporated through a carefully planned
electronically-delivered course, without it being
essential (in pedagogical terms) that students attend the
institution for face-to-face tuition. The same is undoubtedly true
of a hybrid system. It is therefore questionable whether, in the
electronic age, there are sound pedagogical reasons for retaining a
blanket compulsory attendance requirement.
6.
Conclusion
The second year of delivering the
PgDL (CPE) course electronically was successful, as evidenced by
the summative assessment performances of both Year One and Year Two
students. This article has, however, highlighted a higher
withdrawal rate of Year One distance learning students compared to
those on the conventional part-time course. This could be due in
part to the late recruitment of some students, coupled with the
fact that the distance learning course starts at a fast,
undiminishing, tempo. Late recruitment onto the course has been
avoided for the 2000/01 academic year, and it will be interesting
to see if this has any impact upon the withdrawal rate.
The 1999/2000 academic year saw the
introduction of a new and sophisticated electronic learning
environment, Blackboard CourseInfo, which incorporates discussion
boards, chat rooms and group work facilities. Despite these
interactive features, once again collaborative student learning was
not achieved. The 2000/01 academic year will see an emphasis on
tutor-directed use of these facilities with the aim of finally
achieving collaborative learning. Once achieved, the time spent by
tutors providing individual feedback to students' tutorial
submissions may diminish. The provision of outline tutorial answers
in some of the subjects has had a positive downward impact on
tutors' delivery time.
The final issue considered in this
article concerned the CPE Board's requirement that distance
learning students attend the providing institution for twelve days
of face-to-face tuition each year. The three-fold rationale for
this policy was considered and it was concluded that in the
electronic age a compulsory attendance requirement could not be
justified.
With regard to library provision,
distance learning students rarely use the providing institution's
on-campus library. The UK Libraries Plus Scheme, and the provision
of online libraries and Internet resources has diminished the
necessity for students to have access to the institution's
on-campus library. If students have access to a local law library
and/or comprehensive online library, the link between compulsory
attendance and library access is tenuous.
The discussion then moved on to a
consideration of pedagogical issues. It was illustrated how the
full range of teaching activities could be incorporated into an
electronically-delivered course. It is therefore suggested that
there is no pedagogically-based argument in support of the CPE
Board's policy.
CPE course providers should be
freed from the blanket CPE Board policy of compulsory attendance so
that they can decide whether their course should
incorporate:
-
no face-to-face tuition;
-
voluntary face-to-face tuition;
-
compulsory face-to-face tuition;
-
mixed compulsory (e.g. at the start
of each academic year) and voluntary (e.g. at intervals throughout
the academic year) face-to-face tuition.
At the validation or revalidation
event, the CPE Board would be at liberty to decide whether or not a
condition for compulsory and/or voluntary face-to-face tuition
should be imposed where the course provider does not, for example,
provide students with a comprehensive online library (or access to
a local on-campus law library), and/or fails to demonstrate that
the taxonomy of teaching activities are fully incorporated within
their programme.
The future of the CPE Board's
compulsory attendance policy is currently under review. As a member
of the CPE Board's working group considering this issue, I am in a
position to influence, but not determine, the outcome.
Footnotes
1 . See
here for the full
text of the press release from David Lock.
2 . See here for the full text of
the LCD's strategy paper civil.justice.2000: 'A vision of the Civil
Justice System in the Information Age'.
3 . For a discussion
of the AustLII project see the
following articles:
Greenleaf G. et al (1997)
' The
AustLII Papers - New Directions in Law via the
Internet ', Journal of Information, Law
and Technology,1997 (2).
McMahon T, (1999) ' Access to the Law in the Land of
Oz ', Journal of Information, Law and Technology, 1999
(3).
Austin D, Chung P, and Mobray A,
(2000) ' Scalability of Web Resources
for Law: AustLII's Technical Roadmap: Past, Present and
Future ', Journal of Information, Law and Technology, 2000
(1).
4 . The commentary in this
section does not consider different learning styles of
students. For a discussion of the pedagogical issues in relation to
this see: Montgomery M, (1998) ' Addressing Diverse Learning Styles Through the Use of
Multimedia '.
References
Articles
Austin D, Chung P, and Mobray A, (2000) 'Scalability of
Web Resources for Law: AustLII's Technical Roadmap: Past, Present
and Future', Journal of Information, Law and Technology, 2000 (1)
< http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/jilt/2000_1/austin/>.
Chickering A W, and Gamson Z F, (1987) 'Seven
Principles of Good Practice in Undergraduate Education' Faculty
Inventory < www.byu.edu/fc/pages/tchlrnpages/7princip.html >.
Chickering A W, and Ehrman, S C, (1997) 'Implementing
the Seven Principles: Technology as Lever' American Association
for Higher Education
< www.aahe.org/technology/ehrmann.htm >.
Fairhurst J, (1999) 'Evaluation of an Internet-based
PgDL (CPE) Course', The Journal of Information, Law and Technology
1999 (3)
< http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/jilt/1999_3/fairhurst/>.
Feenberg A, (1999a) 'Distance Learning: promise or
Threat?' Crosstalk
<
http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/feenberg/Distance >.
Feenberg A, (1999b) 'Whither Educational Technology',
Volume 1 No. 4 Peer Review < http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/feenberg/peer4.html >.
Grantham D, (2000) 'IOLISplus - The Second Chapter',
The Journal of Information, Law and Technology 2000 (1)
< http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/jilt/2000_1/grantham/>.
Greenleaf G et al (1997) 'The AustLII Papers -
New Directions in Law via the Internet' ,Journal of Information,
Law and Technology 1997 (2)
< http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/jilt/1997_2/greenleaf/>
Herberger M, Scheuermann F and Kaufmann I (1998)
'Collaborative Learning via WWW in Legal Education' ,The Journal of
Information, Law and Technology 1998 (2) < http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/jilt/1998_2/herberger/>.
Jones R and Scully J, (1998) 'Effective Teaching and
Learning of Law on the Web' Web Journal of Current Legal
Issues 1998 (2) < http://webjcli.ncl.ac.uk/1998/issue2/jones2.html >.
McMahon T, (1999) 'Access to the Law in the Land of
Oz', Journal of Information, Law and Technology 1999 (3) < http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/jilt/1999_3/mcmahon/>.
Montgomery M, (1998) Addressing Diverse Learning Styles
Through the Use of Multimedia <
http://www.vpaa.uillinois.edu.tid/resources/montgomery.html >.
Books
Plato (1961) Collected Dialogues , New York:
Pantheon Books
Reports
University of Illinois Report (1999) 'Teaching at an
Internet Distance: the Pedagogy of Online Teaching and Learning'
< http://www.vpaa.uillinois.edu/tid/report/tid_report.html >.
Appendix1 (Screen shots 1-6)
Appendix2 (Screen shots 7-11)
|