Questions & debate

Initial situation

This course is divided into two parts, a presentation by the teacher and practical cases to solve. For this 2e part, the teacher considers that it is important that the correction is done in an interactive way, with the students to allow them to practice and exercise what has been seen during the 1ère hour course. One of the limitations identified was the increasing number of students (250) making discussion difficult (shyness to speak in front of the class, search for the right answer before arguing, lack of discussion between students, etc.).

Project implementation

Before each class, the teacher will ask the students questions on Moodle based on concrete cases that a lawyer might face. The teacher will come back to each of these questions during the theory session. The students’ answers to these questions will allow the teacher to adapt the time spent on each topic.

For the e2nd part of the course, the teacher presents problems to the students (2 to 5). Once the practical case is announced, two lawyers present in the course will confront each other. They each have 1 min 30 to present their arguments. The students will be able to vote for one of the two arguments via the interactive platform SpeakUp. The students will be able to participate in the online exchanges in an anonymous way. Then, the teacher will be able to use these comments to fuel a real debate with the students on the practical case.

Thoughts and advice

Tools such as Votamatic or SpeakUp are a good way to start a discussion with many students to make the course more interactive. Depending on the class, it is sometimes difficult to get students to be active.

Introducing a practical part to one’s course, focusing on student participation, introduces uncertainty and needs to be well prepared. It is easier to get started when your course is well-practiced, you can better distinguish the most important parts and those where students may have difficulties and adapt accordingly.

Student feedback

“The teaching allows us to dive into the heart of the legal profession, to understand the responsibilities, the importance of diligence, but at the same time the beauty. The teacher’s anecdotes are thrilling. He makes us love the profession, explains the details that he has mastered with his fingertips.” “The perfect paragon of the college course working on critical thinking. An excellent course taught by an excellent professor and excellent speakers/assistants. The format of the course with half theory and half debate/exercises, but also the eloquence, humor, passion, and humanity and humility of the professor (in that he shared with us his happy anecdotes, but also his not so good ones, showing us that even great lawyers make mistakes, which is reassuring, but also encouraging) made this course like no other so far.” “Slides are very clear and make it easy to follow the topics. Very well structured course: doing one hour of theory, then one hour of cases is very practical. Doing the old exams allows us to understand what is expected of us. The interaction between the professor and the speaker in the practical cases opens the debate and makes the course dynamic and lively.” “The course lacks a bit of structure. There is a lot of material per chapter. Also, the resolution of the practical cases often boils down to a discussion between different positions and quite often lacked a summary of the answer of the ruling. The fact that many participants are talking across the room increases the difficulty of understanding what they are saying and solving the case study.”