Law in Action: integrating social justice issues into the curriculum using clinical legal education

Rosie Harding and Andrew Francis (Keele University) presented a reflective account of student and staff experiences on the first year of a new clinical legal education module at Keele School of Law.

Rosie and Andrew’s slides are embedded below.

Note: the research that forms the basis of this paper was carried out with Jane Krishnadas, also of Keele University.

Social justice concerns within law schools have been found in the literature to be marginal to the core curriculum, or presented as ‘soft’ exceptions to legal rules. The presenters’ paper provided a critical overview of the practical challenges and benefits of incorporating social justice in a form of clinic into the law school curriculum, arguing that the coalescence of the module’s aims with much of the university’s core mission gives the module institutional respectability and the space to bring ‘social justice’ into the mainstream of legal education.

Law in Action, a level 2, 15 credit undergraduate elective, seeks to place learning law in the context of social justice issues. A combination of pedagogical approaches is used in the module, including critical thinking, group working and learning by doing. A programme of lectures introduces students to thinking about law from the perspective of the subject, for example children’s rights from the perspective of a child, or asylum and immigration law from the perspective of a refugee. Students also work in groups to research and prepare a presentation for a community partner organisation, such as a homelessness charity, Stoke on Trent rape crisis centre, Stoke Citizens Advice Bureau’s immigration and asylum team or in citizenship classes at a local school.

This innovative use of clinic not only provides students with a practical introduction to social justice and community issues but also develops key skills, including teamworking, oral presentation and independent research skills, and contributes to several key university aims such as widening participation, community engagement, knowledge exchange and enhancing the student experience.

The module is assessed through a 4,000 word portfolio, which includes an essay drawing on the themes of the group presentations and the broader context and literature on clinic. The other part of the portfolio is a reflective log, in which students are asked to reflect on their learning throughout the module by addressing questions such as: Have I thought about an aspect of law in a different way? Why? Why not?; How does what I am learning in this course link to my life? Other peoples’ lives?; How do my own views, attitudes, behaviours inform what I am learning on this course?

Many of the students found the Law in Action module to be both enjoyable and intellectually challenging, however some critical views were also expressed, particularly concerning the difficulties of working in groups and the assessment of the community presentation.

Judith Willis (independent consultant) reports:

Rosie and Andrew’s paper could be said to represent a beacon of hope to those raging against what they see as the dying of the liberal law degree.
 
The team sought to provide clinical legal education in an environment where resources were limited and very few staff held practising certificates, closing down several avenues more familiarly used in clinic. Linking with the local community (whose nickname for Keele had been ‘The Kremlin on the Hill’), the clinical element was enhanced by a community element and a street law or legal literacy element.
 
The module presented students with social justice issues that many had not experienced before, some either not wanting to know or even being actively hostile towards them (for example on immigration/asylum). Nevertheless, students overwhelmingly fed back that they found the module interesting, possibly demonstrating engagement on their part and a less instrumental approach to learning. For many students working beyond the academy illuminated their outlooks, opening minds and modifying views.
 
This positive reaction is balanced by the dislike expressed of any requirement of them which did not provide an assessment gain – such work was seen as ‘wasted effort’, in particular the group presentations. In spite of this the teaching team intend to stick with their structure for at least one more year, hoping to focus student attention beyond marks onto the acquisition of skills that such work may entail.
 
The presenters were very positive about the module, which demonstrated that clinical legal education can be imaginative, meaningful and a significant learning experience without having a vocational bias – better still, it gave the teachers a ‘warm and fuzzy’ feeling to see their students develop and change (occasionally even re-considering their career options). Good things all round.

About the presenters

---

Rosie Harding is a lecturer in law at Keele University. She has a long standing interest in increasing the levels of clinical legal education within the law curriculum, alongside her broader research interests in law and social justice. Rosie is module leader for Law in Action.

Andrew Francis is a senior lecturer in law at Keele University. He has recently conducted a UKCLE funded project on Access to legal work experience and its role in the (re)production of legal professional identity. Andrew teaches on the Law in Action module.

Last Modified: 9 July 2010