LESSONS FROM THE WEB

What interests me most about law and lawyering is what I've tended to find along the cutting edge. As a young law teacher in the early 1980s I became excited about a fledgling movement called alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Afterwards, I worked as a court mediator and then later as a private mediator and facilitator as ADR moved from innovation to the mainstream. In 1995, I was hired to facilitate several environmental policy projects which required me to use the Internet to work with stakeholders from across the country. This project helped me to see the great potential such a  global network offered for education and community building. I returned to school and recently completed a graduate program in educational technology. For the past two years I have worked on a variety of projects where I researched and evaluated online learning programs and systems and with faculty to design and develop online courses in a variety of subject areas.

The one field of professional study that to date seems to have eschewed interest in the potential for online education is law. I spoke with several attorneys recently about the possibilities for using the online environment to teach CLE courses. The concern expressed by these lawyers was not that law cannot be taught online but that the format was likely to require more time and effort than most practicing lawyers were willing to invest to complete their CLE requirements. As a result, the vast majority of online CLE courses are delivered in a "talking heads" format using subject matter experts to lecture on various legal topics.

When I began taking and developing online classes I quickly discerned that the most effective web-based courses had much in come with traditional legal education - the best online instruction, like the best law courses, are instructor-facilitated, student-centered, and interactive. The role of the instructor in an online course, as with the role of a law teacher, is not to impart knowledge but rather to design an experience and guide students through a process of discovery through this experience. Unlike conventional teacher-centered education, students in a student-centered learning environment, whether computer-mediated or in a traditional classroom, must actively participate in the educational experience designed by the teacher or, more likely than not, they will fail.

Given these similarities between the best online learning courses and the best law school classes, there is no reason why online learning cannot be adapted effectively for many law courses. Indeed, most law teachers have an advantage compared with faculty in many areas in that law teachers tend to be quite comfortable in the facilitative instructor role. Below are some factors to consider when designing and delivering an effective online course in law or most other fields:

Technology doesn't teach, teachers teach. The most effective online courses are not self-paced tutorials but rather full-courses designed, developed, and delivered by an instructor/subject matter expert to meet the specific learning objectives of the course.

Information is not instruction and instruction is interaction. A major problem with many online courses is that they are not courses at all but textbooks or other copious amounts of information uploaded to the Internet. One of the main reasons a well-designed instructor-led online course works is that students cannot be passive learners in the online environment. In traditional courses, students usually participate in class discussion only when they volunteer or are called on.

The best online courses are interactive and project- (or experience-) oriented. Typically, students are evaluated in the classroom primarily through mid-term or final exams. However, there is no other reliable way for students to learn in the online setting or for instructors to evaluate what they have learned except by their activities and participation in the course each and every week throughout the course. The essence of a well-designed online course is interaction of students -- interaction with the course content, interaction with the instructor, and interaction with other students. Good projects or learning experiences for online learning are:

1. Authentic, i.e., based on problems students are likely to confront in the real-world

2. Designed for students to work on either alone or in groups.

3. Broken down into weekly deliverables

Good online courses depend upon supportive technology. The technology used for online courses must support the needs of the instructor, the students, and the content. It is not critical for an online course to heavily emphasize multimedia elements (e.g. audio, graphics, animation) - a little multimedia goes a long way. The best online learning systems include both synchronous (e.g. chat, white board) and asynchronous (discussion threads, email) tools to simplify and encourage communications. These systems also offer calendars and gradebook tools that help instructors and students schedule, monitor, and track participation, assignments, and grades in addition to mechanisms like bookmarks that help students identify, organize, and share resources.

Technology is not an end in itself. There is no rationale to justify the substantial investments of time, money, and frustration involved in creating, offering, or taking an online class unless there are compelling pedagogical or other benefits for distance learning in a particular environment. Online courses may make it easier and more convenient to complete educational requirements and in some instances may make it easier and more convenient for instructors to deliver courses. The online format may expand the base of students and instructors beyond those who can attend traditional classes.

Online learning is not for everyone or for every situation. Students and instructors must be highly motivated to work effectively in the online environment. Moreover, online learning may not be the most effective forum for the first-year of legal education which relies on the analytical modeling process derived from Socratic dialogue. However, many second and third year law courses focus on case studies or projects or on application or skill-building which makes these areas appropriate for online education.

The online courses I took as a student were more convenient than traditional classes because I mostly was able to complete class requirements at any hour of the day or night. However, my online courses also tended to be demanding in time and effort and they forced me to take greater responsibility for my educational experience than was the case in traditional classes. As an online course developer and facilitator, the best online courses required of me more time, preparation, thought, effort, and finesse. For these reasons, I felt I learned more as a student and became a better instructor in the online educational format than in the traditional classroom. In my view, the superiority of the online environment in certain settings, whether in law courses or otherwise, may make it a viable alternative to traditional classes in some circumstances and therefore worth the extra time, effort, and costs involved.

JURIST's Lessons from the Web series is edited by Professor Patrick Wiseman, Georgia State University College of Law.

———————————————————————

JURIST welcomes your comments on this column and the issues it raises...

• Tuesday December 03, 2002 at 4:34 pm
  This column is very useful and informative to me. Keep it up!! Katy Marcel's article is very helpful. Thank you!
  
  Paula Prather
  Institute for Law School Teaching
  Washington/USA

• Tuesday December 03, 2002 at 4:50 pm
  I agree with your statement that "technology doesn't teach; teachers teach." The online delivery system is really nothing more than a new kind of environment in which to teach. I'm excited by the prospect of law faculty rising to the challenge of this new environment. I think that any teacher who is contemplating using this or any new technology should seriously consider whether and how s/he can best use the medium to further the goal of communicating to and engaging each student. Good article!
  
  Jan Kabili
  University of Colorado School of Law
  Colorado/USA

• Friday December 06, 2002 at 11:41 am
  Having written the initial LFTW column on website construction options, I feared that I might unwittingly contribute to some tacit understanding that the web and other technology could somehow become a substitute for the interactive dialogue which is the benchmark of American legal education. I disavowed that notion in my subsequent JLE article on Electronic Lawyering and the Academy. Thus, I am delighted to see Kathy Marcel's column which succinctly presents the nuts and bolts re the appropriate relationship b/t pedagogy and the use of e-teaching devices: to support--not supplant-- sound legal education.
  
  William Slomanson
  Thomas Jefferson School of Law
  San Diego, CA

• Sunday December 08, 2002 at 3:19 am
  To the titled question,'Can Law Be Taught Effectively Online?',Kathy Marcel comes out with a convincing piece of instruction to all those involved in legal pedagogy.Technology has taken man to dizzy hights of accomplishments.In learning law also technology has extended its long arm to suport and even settle the agenda of modern legal education.A new environment is created where the teacher is compelled to bid good bye to the conventional methods of teaching law.A teacher is to tackle much technology apart from the intricate and enegmatic themes of various legal topics.But the role of the teacher is still paramount in learning law.Any advancement made in technology is not going to cause dimunition to the role of the teacher. then the teacher is to make full use of the possibilities provided by technology. It is here the relevance of the on line learning of law becomes pertinant.It isd here that pioneerse like Kathy Marcel contribute. The observation of the author is suitable when it is said,"The role of the instructor in an on line course,as with the role of law teacher,is not to impart knowledge but rather to design an experience and guide students through a process of discovery through this experience".This is the summary of all educative process. Too much of relevance in the study of law , the very life of which is experience and not logic as already said by O.W.Holmes.It is to" design an experience" and "guide students" to make" discovery" for themselves from the experience. It will not be late when the day comes on line learning of law would dominate in ite province if legal education. With portals like the Jurist doing a praiseworthy job it is all the more assuring. I am a Professor [Part Time] in a National Law School in Kochi India and the Jurist with Prof.Hibbits at the helms playing an anchorman's role has been of immense help.As an advocate practicing in the High Court also the vists to the site of Jurist has been quite informative.Prof. Hibbits' 'Last Writs' is a document of rare merrit.As Lord Tennyson sang to "Ring in the new, and ring out the old", Prof.Hibbits announceses the decline of the conventional law reviews in the context of on line publication of legal material.Jurist through thought-provoking articles by Kathy Marcel in the instant case, and others likeDan Hunter[Dead Professors Walking],Conrad A Johnson[Creating Mult-PurposeContent For The Web],William Slomanson [Four Corners of the Academic Website World],Wendy Seltzer[Teaching With The Bot] etc.provides variety to the protagonists of on line learning of law to get their information uptodate and correct I agree with Kathy Marcel on the point that law can effectively taught on line. Let us make the entire world a stage on which lessons of law are taught on line. DR.K.P.Kylasanatha Pillay, Professor[Part Time]NIALS{National Institute of Advanced Legal Studies]Kochi, Kerala, & Advocate High Court of Kerala, India
  
  DR.K.P.Kylasanatha Pillay
  Advocate and Academic.
  Kerala, India

• Thursday December 26, 2002 at 9:30 am
  Iam here and ready for this format !!! semi-retired
  
  Patrick O\'Dare
  local county mediator
  Florida/ USA

• Sunday February 02, 2003 at 12:15 am
  Interesting that only other teachers are commenting on this. The students are way ahead of you on this one.
  
  Ruth Laura Edlund
  Law Office of Ruth Laura Edlund
  Washington state/USA

• Tuesday April 01, 2003 at 10:16 am
  An interesting question that has been tackled in a laudatory fashion. Kudos to Kathy. I must confer with the author that law can be taught effectively online. But the article does not consider a facet of online teaching that is bound to catch up very soon, if it has not done so already, and that being video conferencing as a medium of instruction. Interactive websites are a much more viable option than information dumped on a site, but video conferencing would beat it hollow. Video conferencing has its own limitations like the synchronisation of time of both the teacher and the student, but if it can be worked out nothing can be better. A word of appreciation from a human face can work wonders, but imagine a monotonous appreciative compliment conferred by a machine into whose face you probably stare for hours in a day. Not very inspiring, eh !! Plus, a teacher draws on years of experience and might just share a valuable tip that might pop into his head during the course of his interaction with a student. Teaching law online must be encouraged. I am all for it. Hope you are too. Have a good day !!
  
  Kranti Vanga
  National Law University, Jodhpur
  India

• Thursday July 24, 2003 at 2:44 pm
  I am a recent participant in the AAMPLE online program at Nova Southeastern University in Ft Lauderdale FL. The program leaves little to be desired. The program is billed as an opportunity for a person with low grades or low LSAT scores to have an opportunity to prove that they can be successful in law school. In reality it is two very difficult classes’ criminal procedure and negotiable instruments given in their entirety in 8 weeks. This is a recipe for failure and discouragement of the very people that are underrepresented in the field of law in the first place. The course moves so fast with very little real time feed back from the professors. We met in chat rooms once a week for about 45 mins with the professor frustrated because of the lack of focus and the students frustrated because they couldn’t get their questions answered. Usually the professor ended the chats by saying I got to go I have another class to teach. Comments on work were routinely received after the next assignment was due. One of the main points of frustration was the many different grades that could possibly be assigned to grade the quizzes. One grader would comment on points that needed to be worked on and I would try to use the suggestions, then on my next assignment a different grader would say something else. Confusing to say the least. To top it off the final exam that counts for 100% of the final grade can not be reviewed. With the possibility of so many different graders checking the exams, a student who has spent the $2,000 tuition plus books, endured the boot camp like program That is not a true indicator of law school performance is denied the opportunity to review their work. This program, no matter how well intoned, is targeting single moms and minorities and misdirecting their money and efforts from LSAT prep courses and other real means of getting admitted into law school and directing them in to a scam that not only takes away money, time and effort but makes them believe that they can't make it in law school.
  
  Robert Williams
  Broward

Please be patient - when you click the Post button your comments have been posted, although they may not show up immediately. If you hit Post again (or Reload) they will be posted twice!