Graduate standards in law: methodology

(Transcript of a section of the Graduate standards in law report, 1997)

The methodology involved preparatory work by a core group (John Bell, Phil Jones, Pat Leighton, Norma Martin Clement, Royston Makepeace), followed by wider consultation through a questionnaire and a workshop of experienced external examiners.

The preparatory work took three forms; a questionnaire to law schools on assessment methods, the production of a draft framework for setting standards, and more specific preparation for the workshops. A short questionnaire was sent to law schools about the range of assessment methods used currently in core subjects, options, and in masters level courses (both conversion courses for graduates in other disciplines and for advanced study in law). This provided a picture of the kind of task externals now faced.

The project based its approach on both a scrutiny of the literature, the work of existing projects, notably the DfEE Discipline Network on
General transferable skills in law, and the knowledge of the core group members about practice in higher education.

From these three elements it was possible to produce some illustrations of ways of setting out standards in relation to law. We considered that at least four aspects provides a good framework for debate; a statement of core elements of a degree, a typology of types of degree, level statements, and descriptions of classes of degree. Of these, the first two are key.

A draft of the core elements of graduateness in law (described as domains of graduateness) provided a clear focus on the relationship of knowledge to skills within law degrees.

A typology of different kinds of degree programme enabled a sharper discussion on whether the expectations of achievement should be the same for students taking law subjects as part of different kinds of programme of study (specialist or single subject, mixed degree, law as a subsidiary subject and vocational degrees).

In order to assist debate, these features were then developed into illustrative grids. By elaborating what might, for example, be a description of the knowledge requirement in a mixed degree programme, it is possible to obtain more constructive comment on the value of distinguishing different types of degree.

Drawing on the work of SEEAC and in a number of institutions some sample level descriptors were produced and articulated for illustration in relation to a specialist, single subject degree. Samples of descriptors for different classes were also assembled.
The materials produced were sent out to a range of colleagues, in particular some 20 experienced external examiners from a range of institutions who were convened for a workshop in Manchester, held on 30 October 1997.

The issues contained in the preliminary materials were presented and discussed among this group. In addition, constraints and concerns about the external examining process were elicited through a questionnaire and discussion. In order to facilitate discussion on standards and external examining, a small number of anonymised scripts were prepared as a mock moderating exercise and were sent out in advance to the participants in the workshop. The workshop also served as a forum for discussing QAA proposals for registered external examiners.

In the light of the workshops and feedback, the draft framework has been re-worked and is being circulated for wider discussion among law schools.

Last Modified: 4 June 2010