Paradigm Shift In Assessment Methodology For Law Students In South Africa

D. Joubert
{"title":"Paradigm Shift In Assessment Methodology For Law Students In South Africa","authors":"D. Joubert","doi":"10.19030/TLC.V10I1.7531","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper addresses the insufficient traditional method of assessment of tests and examination, which is purely the regurgitation of information. Unfortunately some lecturers tend to cling to the traditional method of assessment as it is an easy route for them to follow. The said method does not encourage the students to become critical thinkers and problem solvers, which is of the utmost importance to any student studying law- or law related qualifications. Deep learning is therefore not stimulated, because the students only study what they think is necessary to pass a test or examination paper. All that the traditional method of assessment results in is that a student, after completion of his/her studies, is not able to apply the knowledge which he/she so freely regurgitated. There is therefore no practice based learning taking place and assessment is not learner centred. A definite paradigm shift is necessary in order to ensure that deep learning is achieved by all students and that the students will be fully productive in legal practice when they complete their qualifications (graduateness). In order to implement and facilitate this said paradigm shift, the author addresses the definition of assessment, the purpose of assessment and the difference between deep- and surface learning. The different possible forms, instruments, methods and tools of assessment which the Legal Sciences Department at the Vaal University of Technology could use are addressed. Types of evidence of learning are considered and suggestions are made on best practice in respect of assessment methodology for students in the said department. The motivation and training of the lecturers are also of paramount importance and therefore the author also pays attention to these aspects in this paper. Once lecturers and students realise that it is to the benefit of the students to make assessment learner centred and the importance of constructive alignment, the shift to innovative assessment methods is easy. Students are then assured of holistic development and confident that they will be immediate assets to practice once they complete their qualifications and not burdens to their new employers that requires further training.","PeriodicalId":89968,"journal":{"name":"Journal of college teaching and learning","volume":"12 1","pages":"55-62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of college teaching and learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19030/TLC.V10I1.7531","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper addresses the insufficient traditional method of assessment of tests and examination, which is purely the regurgitation of information. Unfortunately some lecturers tend to cling to the traditional method of assessment as it is an easy route for them to follow. The said method does not encourage the students to become critical thinkers and problem solvers, which is of the utmost importance to any student studying law- or law related qualifications. Deep learning is therefore not stimulated, because the students only study what they think is necessary to pass a test or examination paper. All that the traditional method of assessment results in is that a student, after completion of his/her studies, is not able to apply the knowledge which he/she so freely regurgitated. There is therefore no practice based learning taking place and assessment is not learner centred. A definite paradigm shift is necessary in order to ensure that deep learning is achieved by all students and that the students will be fully productive in legal practice when they complete their qualifications (graduateness). In order to implement and facilitate this said paradigm shift, the author addresses the definition of assessment, the purpose of assessment and the difference between deep- and surface learning. The different possible forms, instruments, methods and tools of assessment which the Legal Sciences Department at the Vaal University of Technology could use are addressed. Types of evidence of learning are considered and suggestions are made on best practice in respect of assessment methodology for students in the said department. The motivation and training of the lecturers are also of paramount importance and therefore the author also pays attention to these aspects in this paper. Once lecturers and students realise that it is to the benefit of the students to make assessment learner centred and the importance of constructive alignment, the shift to innovative assessment methods is easy. Students are then assured of holistic development and confident that they will be immediate assets to practice once they complete their qualifications and not burdens to their new employers that requires further training.
南非法律学生评估方法的范式转变
本文解决了传统的测验和考试评估方法的不足,这种方法纯粹是信息的反刍。不幸的是,一些讲师倾向于坚持传统的评估方法,因为这对他们来说是一种容易遵循的途径。这种方法并没有鼓励学生成为批判性的思考者和问题解决者,而这对任何学习法律或法律相关资格的学生来说都是至关重要的。因此,深度学习不会受到刺激,因为学生们只学习他们认为通过考试或试卷所必需的东西。传统的评估方法所导致的结果是,学生在完成学业后,无法应用他/她如此自由地反刍的知识。因此,没有以实践为基础的学习,评估也不是以学习者为中心的。一个明确的范式转变是必要的,以确保所有学生都能实现深度学习,并确保学生在完成资格证书(毕业)后在法律实践中充分发挥生产力。为了实现和促进这种范式转变,作者阐述了评估的定义、评估的目的以及深度学习和表面学习之间的区别。讨论了瓦尔理工大学法律科学系可以使用的各种可能的评估形式、手段、方法和工具。我们会考虑各种学习证据,并就评估方法的最佳做法提出建议。讲师的动机和培训也是至关重要的,因此作者在本文中也关注了这些方面。一旦教师和学生意识到以学习者为中心的评估和建设性调整的重要性对学生有利,向创新评估方法的转变就很容易了。这样,学生们就能得到全面的发展,并确信一旦他们完成了资格认证,他们将成为实践的直接资产,而不会成为需要进一步培训的新雇主的负担。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书