1. bookVolume 30 (2022): Edition 44 (December 2022)
Détails du magazine
License
Format
Magazine
eISSN
2457-9017
Première parution
16 Apr 2015
Périodicité
2 fois par an
Langues
Anglais
Accès libre

Teaching Legal Reasoning to Law Students in Pakistan: Need for Reforms in LLB Curriculum

Publié en ligne: 10 Nov 2022
Volume & Edition: Volume 30 (2022) - Edition 44 (December 2022)
Pages: 13 - 26
Reçu: 01 May 2022
Accepté: 01 Jul 2022
Détails du magazine
License
Format
Magazine
eISSN
2457-9017
Première parution
16 Apr 2015
Périodicité
2 fois par an
Langues
Anglais

1. Anna, B-E., (2019). Discipline Context Shapes Meaningful Teaching: A Case Study of Academic Law. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43, pp. 508–517.10.1080/0309877X.2017.1377162 Search in Google Scholar

2. Anne, H-M., Heidi, H., Tarja, T., Sakari, M., (2022). Law students’ descriptions of legal reasoning. The Law Teacher. DOI: 10.1080/03069400.2022.2057754 Ouvrir le DOISearch in Google Scholar

3. Boyer, A., (1985). Legal writing program reviewed: Merits, flaws, costs, and essentials. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 62(1), pp. 23–54. Search in Google Scholar

4. Chloe, W., (2018). The Pedagogy of Legal Reasoning: Democracy, Discourse and Community. The Law Teacher, 52, pp. 260–262.10.1080/03069400.2017.1395656 Search in Google Scholar

5. Fleurie, N., (2013). The Worked Example and Expertise Reversal Effect in Less Structured Tasks: Learning to Reason about Legal Cases. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38, pp. 118–19.10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.12.004 Search in Google Scholar

6. Françoise, D. L. D, Jonathan, W., (2005). What Is Competence?. Human Resource Development International, 8, pp. 27–39.10.1080/1367886042000338227 Search in Google Scholar

7. Harner, M. M., (2011). The value of “thinking like a lawyer”. Maryland Law Review, 70(2), pp. 101–130. Search in Google Scholar

8. James, N., Burton, K., (2017). Measuring the critical thinking skills of law students using a whole-of curriculum approach. Legal Education Review, 27, pp. 1–20.10.53300/001c.6087 Search in Google Scholar

9. James, S., (2002). When Law Students Read Cases: Exploring Relations between Professional Legal Reasoning Roles and Problem Detection. Discourse Processes, 34, pp. 57–60.10.1207/S15326950DP3401_3 Search in Google Scholar

10. Liesbeth, B., Lotte, R., (2011). Comparing Students Perceived and Actual Competence in Higher Vocational Education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36, pp. 385–387.10.1080/02602938.2011.553274 Search in Google Scholar

11. LLB Curriculum, (2015). Higher Education Commission of Pakistan. https://hec.gov.pk/english/services/universities/RevisedCurricula/Documents/2014-15/Final%20Curriculum%20%20LLB.pdf [Accessed 29 April 2022]. Search in Google Scholar

12. Melissa, W., (2014). Stargate: Malleability as a Threshold Concept in Legal Education. J Legal Educ, 63, pp. 689–689. Search in Google Scholar

13. Nancy, S., (1992). How Do Lawyers Really Think?. J Legal Educ, 42, pp. 57–60. Search in Google Scholar

14. Natt Gantt, L., (2007). Deconstructing thinking like a lawyer: Analyzing the cognitive components of the analytical mind. Campbell Law Review, 29(3), pp. 413–481. Search in Google Scholar

15. Nievelstein, F., Van Gog, T., Boshuizen, H.P.A., (2010). Effects of Conceptual Knowledge and Availability of Information Sources on Law Students’ Legal Reasoning”. Instr Sci, 38, pp. 23–35.10.1007/s11251-008-9076-3 Search in Google Scholar

16. Rice, S. M., (2015). Leveraging logical form in legal argument: The inherent ambiguity in logical disjunction and its implication in legal argument. Oklahoma City University Law Review, 40(3), pp. 551–596. Search in Google Scholar

17. Spreng, J. E., (2015). Spirals and schemas: How integrated courses in law schools create higher-order thinkers and problem solvers. University of La Verne Law Review, 37(1), pp. 37–102. Search in Google Scholar

18. Stephen, W., (1998). Is Learning to ‘Think like a Lawyer’ Enough?. Yale L & Pol’y Rev, 17, pp. 583–587. Search in Google Scholar

19. Steven, B., (1995). An Introduction to Law and Legal Reasoning, 2nd edition. Little, Brown and Company. Search in Google Scholar

20. Venter, C. M., (2006). Analyze this: Using taxonomies to “scaffold” students’ legal thinking and writing skills. Mercer Law Review, 57(2), pp. 621–644. Search in Google Scholar

21. William, T., David, M., (2010). How to Do Things with Rules, 5th Edition. CUP, pp. 337–38. Search in Google Scholar

22. Wiseman, P., (2006). When you come to a fork in the road, take it and other sage advice for first-time law school exam takers. Georgia State University Law Review, 22(3), pp. 653–664. Search in Google Scholar

Articles recommandés par Trend MD

Planifiez votre conférence à distance avec Sciendo