Teaching methods in South Korean law schools are harsh. Too harsh perhaps – or too backward? There is growing criticism on the quality and practicability of the legal education as provided by South Korea’s new law schools. Reading this week’s article makes clear that much is left to be desired.
For deep learning to occur, learners must be taught in an environment in which he or she feels safe and respected. Obviously grades can be important as indicators of the learners current state of understanding. Grades can even be used as selection tools. However, South-Korean cut-throat grade-competition does not facilitate high quality legal learning.
The focus in any teaching environment should remain on keeping the competence transfer process active. That means providing the learners with challenging and authentic teaching. Collaboration between learners and between learners and lecturers proves increasinly important. Although some stress cannot hurt and might even be useful to focus the mind. Outright fear has no place in a learning environment.
Apparently, too many South-Korean lecturers have not received trained in legal teaching and/or have insufficient experience in legal practice. Little legal professionalism can be the outcome their lecturing.
The situation of South Korean’s legal education can also often be found in law schools of other countries. Teaching the legal profession is still often performed using instructional methods that ignore educational developments during the last fifty years.
The result is a low return on investments in legal teaching. Interestingly, even these low returns are not fully known. Modern measuring methodologies are virtually left unused in the legal sphere. Would legal learning institutes be too fearful to face or expose the quality of their output?