Principle 4: Good Practice Gives Prompt Feedback

Journal of Legal Education

Volumn 49, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 418-429

  LeClercq, Terri ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0442312970     PISSN: 00222208     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Arthur W. Chickering & Zelda F. Gamson, Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education, AAHE Bull., Mar. 1987, at 3, 5.
2. See Ruta K. Stropus, Mend It, Bend It, and Extend It: The Fate of Traditional Law School Methodology in the 21st Century, 27 Loy. U. Chi. L.J. 449, 478-79 (1996).
3. Teaching Students How to "Think Like Lawyers": Integrating Socratic Method with the Writing Process, 64 Temp. L. Rev. 885, 886 (1991).
4. See Philip C. Kissam, Thinking (By Writing) About Legal Writing, 40 Vand. L. Rev. 135, 157 (1987).
5. See James R. Elkins, Writing Our Lives: Making Introspective Writing a Part of Legal Education, 29 Willamette L. Rev. 45, 46 (1993).
6. See Myron Moskovitz, Beyond the Case Method: It's Time to Teach with Problems, 42 J. Legal Educ. 241, 241 (1992); Edward L. Kimball & Larry C. Farmer, Comparative Results of Teaching Evidence Three Ways, 30 J. Legal Educ. 196, 197 (1979).
7. See Myron Moskovitz, Beyond the Case Method: It's Time to Teach with Problems, 42 J. Legal Educ. 241, 241 (1992); Edward L. Kimball & Larry C. Farmer, Comparative Results of Teaching Evidence Three Ways, 30 J. Legal Educ. 196, 197 (1979).
8. See Bari R. Burke, Legal Writing (Groups) at the University of Montana: Professional Voice Lessons in a Communal Context, 52 Mont. L. Rev. 373, 391 (1991).
9. See Nancy Soonpaa, Using Composition Theory and Scholarship to Teach Legal Writing More Effectively, 3 Legal Writing 81, 97 (1997).
10. See Marilla D. Svinicki, Four R's of Effective Evaluation, 7 Teaching Professor 3, 3-4 (1993).
11. See Anne Enquist, Critiquing Law Students' Writing: What the Students Say Is Effective, 2 Legal Writing: 145, 166-68 (1996).
12. See Steven J. Johansen, "What Were You Thinking?" Using Annotated Portfolios to Improve Student Assessment, 4 Legal Writing 123, 124 (1998).
13. See Terri LeClercq, The Premature Deaths of Writing Instructors, 3 Integrated Legal Res. 4, 6-7 (1990/91).
14. See Jean S. Ketter, Using Rubrics and Holistic Scoring of Writing, in Alternatives to Grading Student Writing, ed. Stephen Tchudi, 291 (Urbana, 1997) [hereinafter Alternatives] (including questions, discussion topics, and activities for a workshop on holistic editing); Gail M. Young, Using a Multidimensional Scoring Guide: A Win-Win Situation, in Alternatives, supra, 225 (giving three advantages of quantifying rubrics).
15. See Jean S. Ketter, Using Rubrics and Holistic Scoring of Writing, in Alternatives to Grading Student Writing, ed. Stephen Tchudi, 291 (Urbana, 1997) [hereinafter Alternatives] (including questions, discussion topics, and activities for a workshop on holistic editing); Gail M. Young, Using a Multidimensional Scoring Guide: A Win-Win Situation, in Alternatives, supra, 225 (giving three advantages of quantifying rubrics).
16. See William S. Moore & Steven Hunter, Beyond "Mildly Interesting Facts": Student Self-Evaluations and Outcomes Assessment, in Student Self-Evaluation: Fostering Reflective Learning, ed. Jean MacGregor, 65, 79 (San Francisco, 1993).
17. See Mary Beth Beazley, The Self-Graded Draft Teaching Students to Revise Using Guided Self-Critique, 3 Legal Writing 175, 187 (1997).
18. See Barbara Child, Checklists: Versatile Tools for Teaching Writing, 7 Second Draft 1, 1, 10 (1991).
19. See Kimberlee K. Kovach, The Lawyer as Teacher: The Role of Education in Lawyering, 4 Clinical L. Rev. 359, 388 (1998).
20. For the distinction between collaborative and cooperative learning, see Clifford S. Zimmerman, "Thinking Beyond My Own Interpretation": Reflections on Collaborative and Cooperative Learning Theory in Law School Curriculum, 31 Ariz. St. L.J. 957 (1998).
21. Improving Your Teaching Through Small-Group Diagnosis, 39 C. Teaching 80, 80 (1991).
22. See Faith Gabelnick et al., Learning Communities: Creating Connections Among Students, Faculty, and Disciplines 54 (San Francisco, 1990).
23. See Paul T. Wangerin, The Evaluation of Teaching in Law Schools, 11 J. Prof. Legal Educ. 87, 87 (1993).
24. In one study students gave only 12 percent of their teachers a rating less than average. William Roth, Student Evaluation of Law Teaching, 17 Akron L. Rev. 609, 611 (1984). See also Richard L. Abel, Evaluating Evaluations: How Should Law Schools Judge Teaching? 40 J. Legal Educ. 407 (1990); Daniel Gordon, Does Law Teaching Have Meaning? Teaching Effectiveness, Gauging Alumni Competence, and the MacCrate Report, 25 Fordham Urb. L.J. 43, 50 (1997).
25. In one study students gave only 12 percent of their teachers a rating less than average. William Roth, Student Evaluation of Law Teaching, 17 Akron L. Rev. 609, 611 (1984). See also Richard L. Abel, Evaluating Evaluations: How Should Law Schools Judge Teaching? 40 J. Legal Educ. 407 (1990); Daniel Gordon, Does Law Teaching Have Meaning? Teaching Effectiveness, Gauging Alumni Competence, and the MacCrate Report, 25 Fordham Urb. L.J. 43, 50 (1997).
26. In one study students gave only 12 percent of their teachers a rating less than average. William Roth, Student Evaluation of Law Teaching, 17 Akron L. Rev. 609, 611 (1984). See also Richard L. Abel, Evaluating Evaluations: How Should Law Schools Judge Teaching? 40 J. Legal Educ. 407 (1990); Daniel Gordon, Does Law Teaching Have Meaning? Teaching Effectiveness, Gauging Alumni Competence, and the MacCrate Report, 25 Fordham Urb. L.J. 43, 50 (1997).
27. See Maryellen Weimer, Improving College Teaching: Strategies for Developing Instructional Effectiveness, 59, 66-67, 72 (San Francisco, 1990) (including table of formative feedback instruments).
28. See M. W. Jackson & M. T. Prosser, Less Lecturing, More Learning, 14 Stud. Higher Educ. 55, 61 (1989).
29. See Eric W. Orts, Quality Circles in Law Teaching, 47 J. Legal Educ. 425, 427-31 (1997).
30. See Gordon, supra note 22, at 73-75.
31. See Weimer, supra note 23, at 93-94.
32. See Leonard L. Baird, A Survey of the Relevance of Legal Training to Law School Graduates, 29 J. Legal Educ. 264, 265 (1978).