The Reflective Prof

In the midst of this pandemic crisis, educators have been challenged to create meaningful and engaging online learning experiences for our students.  We do our best but we always wonder “What are those experiences in the eyes and hearts of our students?”.

Recently, I had the privilege of reading the reflections of some of my students on how they have adapted to online learning.  These reflections are from an assignment called a Reflective Learning Journal.  Students are asked to describe learning experiences they have had in the course that have developed a set of “core competency” skills. These skills include communication, critical thinking, problem solving, agility and adaptability. When this assignment is done well, students gain an awareness and understanding of their own thought processes; i.e. metacognition. I, as an educator, get an invaluable glimpse into the inner workings of their minds. 

Two of my students wrote about how they have adapted to online learning. When I read their reflections, I was struck by the depth of their insights. I think these insights are worth sharing. (Note: Both students very generously provided their consent for the use of their names and reflections in this blog.)

The two students, Alex and Winnie, are polar opposites in terms of their starting points. Alex described himself as being “rather computer literate” and having a love of “exploring and learning new programs and protocols”.   Winnie, on the other hand, said that the transition to online learning was not one that she welcomed and she described herself as “the kind of student who preferred hardcopy textbooks instead of online copies”.

I will let their unedited reflections speak for themselves. (Note: I have broken down the reflections into smaller paragraphs for better readability.)

ALEX:  I’m a firm believer that to do well in life, you need to be able to adapt to changing situations, and have the agility to keep up. With that said, nothing could be a better example than our switch from learning in-class to online because of COVID-19. No 2020-based self-reflection isn’t complete without acknowledging or even touching briefly on the global pandemic disease that’s changed all our lives currently. As such, the ability to adapt to a new situation and to be agile enough to keep up has been truly tested with our new online classes. 

I myself am rather computer literate; I spend far too much time on computers, and love exploring and learning new programs and protocols. With that in mind, I think the recent opportunity to learn WebEx and learn how our online classroom environment works has been not only fascinating, but incredibly beneficial. Since switching to WebEx, I’ve had to learn an entirely new program, which is great because I understand I’ll likely be using it in the future, but a switch to online classes like WebEx also help by throwing you into the deep-end of being adaptable. There wasn’t much time to learn, but I figured out WebEx fast; I wish others had done the same when they didn’t seem to know you could manually mute your mic! As well, having to quickly learn how the ‘Breakout Sessions’ worked and how the ‘whiteboard’ sessions worked was useful too, as we had a limited amount of time to get our answers in. 

But I digress, having to learn something unfamiliar and new quickly, gives you the opportunity to hone and advance those agility and adaptability skills. You can take your exploratory skills and experience with computers and try to figure out which each function does; such as realizing you can share your screen with your ‘Breakout Session’ members, or when I realized I had to unmute them so they could talk. Like the saying goes, you either sink or swim, and by having to learn a new piece of software in a few minutes, truly tests your skills, and helps you become more agile and a fast learner for the future.

WINNIE: I am sure that every student at Sheridan has experienced this and it may not be a uniquely personal experience, but I do believe it greatly challenged how I approach my own education. As a person who is a stickler for routine and not big on changing how I study or learn, the beginning transition onto an online learning platform in a home environment was not one that I welcomed. 

I strongly preferred an in-class teaching environment where I was able to respond the nuances of a classroom and while this may not be relevant, I am also the kind of student who preferred hardcopy textbooks instead of online copies. What I am trying to say is that I learn best by hands-on and tactical approaches and that learning through a screen is not something I like.

Although I know that all students and faculty face the same experience that I am, I do believe that it has changed how I react and adapt to these uncontrollable situations. While I am a usually quiet student in class, I did thoroughly enjoy how the in-class case discussions required us to work together as a group to figure out the solution. Its an approach that forced me to take a more hands-on approach in the classroom by participating but in an online environment, it is a little more difficult to adapt to since I am also working with new software and new people. In the virtual classroom, many people are muted, and the usual dynamics and nuances of an actual in-class discussion just can’t be replicated. 

But in the last few weeks, I changed my habits in order to adapt to this situation because I understood that being frustrated was not something that would help me. It challenged me to find a new way to approach how I would process information in this class and how I would collaborate with others without being face-to-face, but I believe that this experience has changed how I can adapt to unknown situations. After all, being flexible and adaptable is a skill that can benefit me in my career.

My new video on the tort of public disclosure of private facts as established by the Ontario Superior Court in Jane Doe 464533 v. N.D., 2016 ONSC 541.

On my course website, I usually have a short message saying “hello”, “welcome” and some instructions on what to do before the first class.  I recently read a memo that Maryellen Weimer at Penn State uses to welcome her students at the begining of a semester. I was struck by how that memo addresses what is needed for a successful learning partnership between instructor and students, and also the essential humanity of that relationship.  I used Maryellen’s words as the basis of my message to introduce myself and the course to my students this semester.  Thank you Maryellen. Here’s the message I posted on my course website:

Teaching my students to think critically is one of the holy grails that I strive for.  From birth, we are all critical thinkers. As infants, we say “NO” to the tasteless green broccoli mush. As kids, we pester our parents with “WHY” questions. “Why is the sky blue?”  “Why is my hair black?”   As teenagers, we challenge rules laid down by our parents. “Why do I need to be home by midnight?”   Throughout our lives, we naturally ask questions, challenge the opinions of others and form our own opinions.  That’s critical thinking.

Most students intuitively know how to think critically. My challenge is to have my students tap into that raw ability. Apply it in a methodical manner. And communicate that methodical thought process.  In other words, it’s easy to have an opinion, but difficult to support that opinion with principled analysis and even more difficult to communicate that analysis to others.

Simple Analytical Framework

To have students apply critical thinking in a methodical manner, it is important to provide them with a simple analytical framework into which critical thinking is channelled. In teaching law to undergraduate business students, I provide a simple three-step legal analysis: (1) identify the legal issue, (2) state the applicable law, and (3) apply that law to the facts of the case to come to a legal opinion.  This three-step analytical framework can be restated generically so it can be applied to subject matter other than law: (1) identify the issue, (2) state the applicable rule or principle, and (3) apply that rule/principle to the facts of the situation. I ask my students to apply this three-step analysis to fact situations based on real court cases.

To demonstrate this three-step analysis, I provide in class a simple example that most of them are familiar with. “In a baseball game, a hitter hits the ball into the air and then the ball is caught by an outfielder. Do a three-step analysis for the umpire.”  

1. Issue:  Is the batter out?
2. Applicable rule:  When the ball is hit by a batter into the air, the hitter is out if the ball is caught by an opposing player without touching the ground.
3. Apply the rule to the facts:  Since the outfielder caught the ball before it hit the ground, the batter is out.

Communicating the Analysis

To develop their ability to communicate critical thinking, it is important to have students express their thinking in writing. I have students do that in small groups and individually.  In class, my students work in groups of 3 or 4 on case problems. They write up their three-step legal analyses and post it online on Socrative. Everyone’s answers are projected on the screen in class. I ask them to vote on Socrative for the answer that is the best legal analysis. And then I critique the top two or three answers.  No grades are at stake. These are safe opportunities for students to make mistakes and to learn from those mistakes.

I also get students to work individually by posting their legal analyses of case problems online in class discussion forums. Feedback is posted by both me and other students in the class.

Critical thinking is a difficult to teach but it is an incredibly important skill that will allow our students to be successful in work and to be contributing citizens in society.

It’s midterm exam time again. Students write exams. Professors grade those exams. Some students are unhappy. Students meet with professors to review those exams.

An exam review meeting can go in any number of ways depending on the student’s mindset. If the student comes with an open mindset to learn how they may improve, the meeting has the potential to be a constructive dialogue to help the student form useful learning strategies. If the student comes with a narrow focus on litigating how their exam was marked, the meeting will likely be just about the mechanics of how the marking rubric was applied. Some of those kind of meetings that I have been a party to end with me saying, “We’ll have to agree to disagree.”

This semester I am trying something new to, hopefully, increase the likelihood of having more useful dialogues with my students regarding their midterm results. I devised a short online questionnaire for them to complete before meeting with me.  I call it  a Mid-Course Personal Performance Evaluation.  Students are prompted to reflect on specific aspects of their work habits and their progress in the course.

By completing this questionnaire, the hope is that student mindsets are shifted away from the narrow mechanical focus of their exam results to a broader functional focus of assessing the learning habits and processes that led to those results. Consequently, the overall focus of the exam review meeting should be on how to improve a student’s overall progress in the course, not just how an exam was graded.

I have uploaded 8 new videos onto The Reflective Prof channel on YouTube.

• Punitive Damages: Whiten v Pilot Insurance
• Exclusion Clauses: Tilden Rent-a-Car Co v. Clendenning
• Pre Existing Contractual Obligation Owed to the Same Party: Gilbert Steel
• Pre Existing Contractual Obligation Owed to a Third Party: Pau On v. Lau Yiu Long
• Tort of Intrusion Upon Seclusion: Jones v. Tsige
• Intellectual Property Law: Balancing individual rights and societal benefits
• Fair Dealing: CCH Canadian v. Law Society of Upper Canada
• Vicarious Tort Liability: Bazley v. Curry

Enjoy!

Wayland

Source: Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog, http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/2012/09/05/reading-and-briefing-cases-in-law-school/

Ask almost any professor at a law school: the best way to learn law is to “read the law”.  What that means is that to learn law, students should read the primary sources of law – statutes, regulations and court cases – instead of secondary sources such as textbooks, articles and blogs.   That’s why most law school courses are taught using casebooks, instead of textbooks.

When law is taught to non-law students, that law-school approach in its purest form, does not work.    Business students do not know how to read and interpret cases and legislation from scratch.  Even lawyers and law students have difficulty interpreting the average Supreme Court decision with 50-plus pages.

As a professor teaching law to undergraduate business students, I try to remember that teaching from primary sources is still very important.  In particular, it’s the facts of cases that give life to and animate legal principles.  Cases help ground legal principles to the real world.

I have been taking a MOOC (massive open online course) by Professor Randal Picker of the University of Chicago Law School called “Internet Giants: The Law and Economics of Media Platforms”. The content of that course is fascinating especially how Professor Picker demonstrates how the economics of internet media platforms (such as Google, PC operating systems, smartphones) relates to the applicable law and government policy.  What I have also found fascinating is how Professor Picker teaches his material.  There are no fancy graphics and videos.  He does use powerpoint, but not in a common way.  A common way that we all see everyday is to put a list of bullet points on each slide.  Instead most of Professor Picker’s slides have a big picture of the front page of a primary source document such as court decision.  Then, he “zooms in” on specific passages in the document as he is lecturing.  Instead of summarizing or paraphrasing a case, he is highlighting specific key passages to explain his points. The central focus remains the law, not any secondary summary.

Professor Picker’s approach stays true to the spirit of “read the law”.  Since the course is a MOOC, Professor Picker probably knows that he cannot reasonably expect his students to pick up and read from beginning to end the cases, legislation and government policies that he refers to.  He explains the law in his own words and insight while highlighting key passages from the primary sources.

I have started to apply Professor Picker’s approach in my own teaching. These are a couple of examples of slides I have developed for lecture videos to explain various clauses in a contract.

Note: This post has nothing to do with education. I felt compelled to write it in light of recent events in Europe.

Today, I am German.  I don’t live in Germany and I am not a German citizen. My family has no trace of any German heritage.  Although I do like the occasional bratwurst and beer and I admire German engineering, I am not overly enamoured with the German stereotype of being the dour and efficient taskmasters of Europe.   In fact, I live in Canada, and my passport proudly bears the Canadian coat of arms.

As the world is finally comprehending the vast human tragedy of the Syrian refugee crisis, Germany has been more Canadian than Canada – at least based on what I believe my country should represent.  Germany led by its leader Angela Merkel has been the only major western country consistently asking “How can we help these people?”.  In contrast, other leaders have been asking, “How can we keep them out?” or “How can we send them back?”.  Chancellor Merkel has courageously stood up to be counted.   In the face of Germans waving placards accusing her of being the people’s traitor, Angela Merkel said,  “There can be no tolerance of those who question the dignity of other people. There is no tolerance of those who are not ready to help, where, for legal and humanitarian reasons, help is due.”  Germany walks that talk: it has taken in over 800,000 asylum seekers.  Will Hutton of The Guardian commented, “Angela Merkel’s humane stance on immigration is a lesson to us all.”   Unlike most political leaders, Chancellor Merkel truly views the situation as a humanitarian crisis, instead of a political one, with the key question being “How can we help our fellow human beings?”.

Other major countries, including Canada and the UK, should be ashamed of our relative inaction. My Prime Minister asserts that we have the most generous refugee policy in the world.  Mr. Harper, let’s place political will and action behind that statement.  Steven Harper can look to the actions of his Progressive Conservative predecessors in the Vietnamese boat people crisis for precedent and inspiration.  As for now, I consider myself a proud German.

Wayland Chau