| Summary: | This paper is the result of personal reflection that I undertook during the course of a professional development programme at London Metropolitan University. It was also written days after the University’s Legal Practice Course (LPC) had received its triennial, three-day monitoring visit by the Law Society. During that visit I had to represent the course and present our teaching, curriculum and assessment rationales. However, it is perhaps a misnomer to refer to our ‘assessment rationale’ because while we may develop our own learning outcomes and tweak the curriculum, the Law Society prescribes assessment instruments and criteria. I assumed I would be able to engage in a stimulating debate with the Law Society by plotting our course’s progress with reference to current developments in teaching and learning. However, I emerged from the meetings with the feeling that the assessors did not appreciate what I was talking about. They appear to rely on assessment checklists based upon decades-old narratives and the now prevalent concept of ‘deep-learning’ did not seem to resonate with them.
|
|---|