What a LUVLE way to learn Law

TQEF Project

HEDC Teaching Day - July 2002

Sefton Bloxham

Lancaster University Law School

Background

Design & Development Lotus Domino, drop down menus, resources, link to

student records

Collaboration LULS/LTG, 6 years, email & regular meetings

Pedagogy (1)

Achieving “effective learning” learner activity, learner interaction, motivational context,

structured knowledge base (Ramsden, Biggs, Gibbs)

Embedding skills development professional validation, law benchmarks, enhancement of

knowledge acquisition & understanding (Laurillard)

Aligning the learning environment course design, student construction of knowledge

(Prosser & Trigwell, Jones & Scully)

Pedagogy (2)

Moderating online learning access & motivation, socialisation, information

exchange, knowledge construction (Salmon)

Problem-based learning simulation of professional practice, collaborative

learning, self-evaluation of learning process (Boud & Feletti)

Course Design

Minimal number of “outline” lecturesActive seminar sessions / team-based

activities / oral presentationsNetworked negotiation assignment (2nd term)Continuous assessment

Course Assessment Structure

Networked negotiation exercises & discussions

60% coursework (continuous assessment) / 40% examination

Formative and summativeIndividual (35%) / team-based (25%) / peer

assessment

The Negotiations

TaskCommunicationsAssessment

Negotiations - Task

4-party problem or case studyIdentification of legal basis for claimsNegotiation of settlementsPlenary sessionWritten report

Negotiations - Communications

Administrative Notice board (read only)

Resources area (read only)

Course & Seminar Group discussion areasTeam areasInter-team areas

Negotiations - Assessment Criteria

Legal accuracyNegotiating strategyClarity of communication Presentation of report

Student Survey - demography

Demographic Information

Female 32 61.5%Male 20 38.5%

Off Campus 20 38.5%On Campus 32 61.5%

Private internet access 23 44.2%Public internet access 29 55.8%

Total sample 52

Student Evaluation of LUVLE

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

I enjoy w orking w ith the technology on this course

I found the system easy to use overall

I found the noticeboard section of the site useful as a w ay to f indout w hat w as happening

I found the general discussion areas useful for asking the tutorsquestions.

I found the resources section of the site a good source of furtherresources/information

I found the seminar group discussion space useful.

I found the individual team discussion space useful forcommunicating w ith others in the team.

I found the inter-team discussion spaces useful for conducting thenegotiations

Agree

Agree Somewhat

Unsure

Disagree Somewhat

Disagree

Content v Technology

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Agree Agreesomewhat

Unsure Disagreesomewhat

Disagree

This course concentrated on the subject content,on what I had to learn.

The way I worked with others and used thetechnology was more important on this coursethan the subject content.

Student-directed v Tutor-directed

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Agree Agreesomewhat

Unsure Disagreesomewhat

Disagree

As a student I needed to be more self-directed onthis course.

In this course the staff gave us detailedinstructions on what to do and how to do it.

Staff evaluation of LUVLE

Technological “fine tuning”Development of resources areaFrom teacher to e-moderator! Management of staff timeMonitoring mechanismStaff development issues