Evidence Beyond the Rules: A Critical Thinking Approach to Teaching Evidence Law to Undergraduate Students
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article suggests that using a critical thinking approach in teaching undergraduate courses such as Evidence is not only consistent with education in the liberal arts but offers valuable opportunities to enhance student learning, develop transferable skills, and explore interdisciplinary connections.
Downloads
Article Details
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC-BY) 4.0 International, allowing others to share the work with proper acknowledgement and citation of the work's authorship and initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- Authors are able to enter separate, additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- In pursuit of manuscripts of the highest quality, multiple opportunities for mentoring, and greater reach and citation of JoSoTL publications, JoSoTL encourages authors to share their drafts to seek feedback from relevant communities unless the manuscript is already under review or in the publication queue after being accepted. In other words, to be eligible for publication in JoSoTL, manuscripts should not be shared publicly (e.g., online), while under review (after being initially submitted, or after being revised and resubmitted for reconsideration), or upon notice of acceptance and before publication. Once published, authors are strongly encouraged to share the published version widely, with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
References
Aiken, J. H. (2006). Teaching the rules of “truth.” Saint Louis University Law Journal, 50(4), 1075-1090. Retrieved from https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/1640/.
American Association for Paralegal Education (2013). AAfPE core competencies for paralegal programs. Retrieved from http://online.fliphtml5.com/uuro/ysbc/#p=2.
Bergman, P. Teaching evidence the “reel” way. Quinnipiac Law Review, 21(4), 973-992. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org.
Berrett, Dan (2016, April 3). If Skills Are the New Canon, Are Colleges Teaching Them? The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://chronicle.com/article/If-SkillsAre-the-New- Canon/235948?cid=at&utm_source=at&utm_medium=en&elqTrackId=d8f0cd0a249c491b8c977538ae39728a&elq=34bc9dacbc8a4916884f5621e76162a4& elqaid=8525&elqat= 1&elqCampaignId=2819
Cartwright, N., & Hardie, J. (2012). Evidence-based policy: A practical guide to doing it better. New York, NY: Oxford.
Currier, K. A., & Eimerman, T. E. (2009). Introduction to law for paralegals: A critical thinking approach (4th Ed.). New York, NY: Aspen.
Dreger, A. (2015). Galileo's middle finger: heretics, activists, and the search for justice in science. New York: Penguin Press.
Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Newark, DE: American Philosophical Association..Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Facione&ff1=autFacione%2c+Peter +A.&id=ED315423.
Fabris, C. (2015, January 20). College students think they’re ready for the work force. Employers aren’t so sure. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://chronicle.com/article/College-Students-Think/151289
Fisher, G. (2003, Spring). Compelling evidence [Interview by J. Rabinovitz]. Stanford Lawyer, 37(2), 8-12.
Fisher, G. (2002). Evidence. New York, NY: Foundation Press.
Fonda, H. (Producer), Rose, R. (Producer), & Lumet, S. (Director). (1957). 12 angry men [Motion picture]. United States: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.
Friedman, R. L. (2004). The elements of evidence (3rd. ed.). Saint Paul, MN: West Academic.
Gabbay, D. M., & Woods, J. (2010). Logic and the law: Crossing the lines of discipline. In D. M. Gabbay, P. Canivez, S. Rahman, & A. Thiercelin (Eds.), Approaches to legal rationality (pp. 165-201). New York, NY: Springer.
Jones, E. A., Hoffman, S., Moore, L. M. Ratcliff, S., Tibbetts, B., & Click, A. L. (1995). National assessment of college student learning: Identifying college graduates’ essential skills in writing, speech and listening, and critical thinking. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED383255.
Kinports, K. (1991). Evidence engendered. University of Illinois Law Review, 1991(2), 452-55. Retrieved from https://elibrary.law.psu.edu/fac_works/185/.
Klein, K. S. (2013). Why federal rule of evidence 403 in unconstitutional and why that matters. University of Richmond Law Review, 47(4), 1077. Retrieved from https://scholarlycommons.law.cwsl.edu/fs/61/.
Koenig, S. (Producer). Serial [Audio podcast]. Retrieved from https://www.serialpodcast.org.
Launer, D. (Producer), Schiff, P. (Producer), & Lynn, J. (Director). (1992). My cousin Vinny [Motion picture]. United States: Twentieth Century-Fox.
Lukianoff, G., & Haidt, J. (2015, September). The coddling of the American mind. Atlantic Monthly, 316(2), 42-52.
Miller, C. EvidenceProf [Web log]. Retrieved from https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof.
Mueller, C. B., & Kirkpatrick, L.C. (2012). Evidence (5th ed.). Saint Paul, MN: Thomson West.
Nelson, C. E. (1999). On the persistence of unicorns: The trade-off between content and critical thinking revisited. In B.A. Pescosolido & R. Aminzade (Eds.), The social worlds of higher education: Handbook for teaching in a new century (168-184). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge.
Nosich, G. M. (2009). Learning to think things through: A guide to critical thinking across the curriculum (3rd Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Orenstein, A. (1999). Feminism and evidence. In B. Taylor, S. Rush, & R. J. Munro (Eds.), Feminist jurisprudence, women and the law: critical essays, research agenda, and bibliography (pp. 507-538). Littleton, CO: F.B. Rothman.
Palmer, A. (2011). Why and how to teach proof. Sydney Law Review, 33(3), 563-573. Retrieved from www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/SydLawRw/2011/24.pdf.
Putnam, W.H., & Albright, J. R. (2014). Legal research, analysis, and writing (3rd ed.). Clifton Park, NY: Delmar Cengage Learning.
Roberts, P. (2002). Rethinking the law of evidence: A twenty-first century agenda for teaching and research. Current Legal Problems, 55(1), 297-345. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/clp/55.1.297.
Root, H. (2014, April 21). No hard sciences? Then no job offer. Minneapolis Star Tribune, p. D6.Schaberg, C. (2015, June 11). Thinking critically about critical thinking [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://www.publicbooks.org/thinking-critically-about-critical-thinking/
Shapiro, S. J. (1996). The use and effectiveness of various learning materials in an evidence class. Journal of Legal Education, 46(1), 101-109.
Shepard v. United States, 290 U.S. 96 (1933). Retrieved from https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/290/96/.
Sullivan, W.M., Colby, A., Wegner, J. W., Bond, L., & Shulman, L.S. (2007). Educating lawyers: Preparing for the profession of law. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Wiley.
Thayer, J. B. (1898). A preliminary treatise on the law of evidences at the common law. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
Tribe, L. (1974). Triangulating hearsay. Harvard Law Review, 87(5), 957-974. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1340046.
Twining, W. (2006). Rethinking evidence: Exploratory essays (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge.
Vidmar, N., Beale, S.S., Chermerinsky, E., & Coleman, J. E. (2007). Was he guilty as charged? An alternative narrative based on the circumstantial evidence from “12 Angry Men.” Retrieved from https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/faculty_scholarship/1814/.