Using problem-based learning to teach constitutional and administrative law

This case study, by Andrew Scott of the University of East Anglia, outlines the use of problem-based learning to teach constitutional and administrative law programme. To find out contact Andrew on e-mail: a.d.scott@uea.ac.uk.

Problem-based learning methods are deployed in a number of units at Norwich Law School across both undergraduate and postgraduate programmes. In the first year undergraduate constitutional and administrative law unit, followed by around 230-240 students, they are used in the spring semester to teach the judicial review and civil liberties aspects of the syllabus. The methods in general – and the specific agenda for the spring semester – are introduced and discussed with students in dedicated interactive lectures delivered towards the end of the autumn semester.

In essence the semester’s work comprises the consideration of three separate problems. Solutions to these problems are developed by students working in groups. These groups consist of between six and eight students, and remain intact for the duration of the semester. The
first problem centres on aspects of the law and procedure of judicial review, the second problem on freedom of expression and human rights law more broadly, and the third problem on a combination of the two. Collectively, they are designed to cover the necessary curriculum content; each contains triggers to prompt students into investigating the identified core areas. The problems are somewhat open-ended, however, and experience to date has seen student groups present a range of innovative solutions, going beyond or sideways from expected responses.

Each problem is tackled over a structured four week cycle, with the programme designed to offer the necessary degree of staff support:

Programme timetable

Students are presented with the problem scenario in advance of the week one problem workshop, and are expected to read over this material before attending the class. In class each study group is asked to consider the scenario, to ensure that all members of the study group understand its details, and to identify what might be the main issues that arise from the problem. In particular, they are asked to make a note of such information/knowledge they believe they need in order to respond to the issues raised; that is, the students attempt to identify what they do not yet know. They might also speculate as to possible solutions based on their existing knowledge, whether gained from previous legal studies or some other experience. Students are further asked to consider what resources they might use in order to answer their questions. The outcome of this discussion is an agreed list of issues that the study group has identified as worthy of further research.

The research agenda produced by each study group is uploaded onto the Blackboard virtual learning environment for other groups to peruse, and perhaps to identify issues that they had not themselves seen in the problem. In addition to members of each study group working together, students also have access to an online discussion of the problem scenario (again utilising Blackboard). This discussion is overseen and contributed to by staff. Students have contributed findings from their own research, ruminated on the problem scenario, advised others of useful resources, and posed questions that have troubled them for others (students and staff) to consider and respond. The threads of this discussion remain as a cumulative resource.

During the second week in the cycle the class as a whole assembles for interactive lectures on areas of law pertinent to the problem. The basic format includes:

• the presentation by a member of staff of an overview of the relevant law, with a heavy emphasis on the identification – but not full discussion – of the seminal cases and important statutes for each area of importance
• the opportunity for individual students and study groups to enter comment and raise queries on any particular point. Such issues will then reflected upon by staff and the year group as a whole. The mode of operating, however, is not simply the straight provision of information. The emphasis is on guidance and not instruction.

Each study group works together ultimately to develop and submit a short written report (skeleton argument) on the legal issues arising from each problem scenario. This is submitted on Blackboard in advance of the problem moot scheduled for week three in each cycle, to allow the opposing study group an opportunity to reflect on the likely arguments that will be raised in the moot. The moot itself comprises an opportunity for each study group to present its case, and to respond to questions, for a period of 20 minutes. Thus, the group appoints two or three persons to represent them at each event. The class concludes with comment from the tutor on the arguments presented and the presentation style of those involved.

In week four of each cycle two review lectures involve further discussion of the problem, general comment on the solutions presented by groups in the mooting events and a further opportunity for students to pursue particular matters further. In particular, the lecture is designed to allow staff to locate the expertise and knowledge gained by students within the wider context of the studies for the semester. During the lecture members of staff may present a series of minor variations on the factual circumstances and ask students to consider for the future what impact such changes might have had on the legal resolution of the problem.

Last Modified: 4 June 2010