选择题考试可以用来评估法律推理吗?法律专业学生成绩与态度的实证研究

IF 0.7 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Legal Education Review Pub Date : 2021-04-29 DOI:10.53300/001C.23484
Danielle Bozin, Felicity Deane, James Duffy
{"title":"选择题考试可以用来评估法律推理吗?法律专业学生成绩与态度的实证研究","authors":"Danielle Bozin, Felicity Deane, James Duffy","doi":"10.53300/001C.23484","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this article is to examine whether legal reasoning skills can be appropriately assessed in a law degree, using multiple-choice question assessment. The use of multiple-choice assessment in university law schools is common, although not universally accepted as an effective pedagogical tool. In this article, both quantitative and qualitative empirical research methods have been adopted to examine whether the unique skill of legal reasoning is amenable to being tested through multiple-choice assessment. The position argued is that multiple-choice assessment, when properly constructed using identified guiding principles, is an efficient and effective way to assess legal reasoning abilities.","PeriodicalId":43058,"journal":{"name":"Legal Education Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can Multiple Choice Exams Be Used to Assess Legal Reasoning? An Empirical Study of Law Student Performance and Attitudes\",\"authors\":\"Danielle Bozin, Felicity Deane, James Duffy\",\"doi\":\"10.53300/001C.23484\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The purpose of this article is to examine whether legal reasoning skills can be appropriately assessed in a law degree, using multiple-choice question assessment. The use of multiple-choice assessment in university law schools is common, although not universally accepted as an effective pedagogical tool. In this article, both quantitative and qualitative empirical research methods have been adopted to examine whether the unique skill of legal reasoning is amenable to being tested through multiple-choice assessment. The position argued is that multiple-choice assessment, when properly constructed using identified guiding principles, is an efficient and effective way to assess legal reasoning abilities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43058,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Legal Education Review\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Legal Education Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53300/001C.23484\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legal Education Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001C.23484","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文的目的是通过选择题评估来检验法律推理技能是否可以在法律学位中得到适当的评估。在大学法学院中,选择题评估的使用很常见,尽管并没有被普遍接受为一种有效的教学工具。本文采用了定量和定性的实证研究方法来检验法律推理的独特技能是否适合通过多项选择评估进行测试。主张的立场是,如果使用已确定的指导原则正确构建多项选择题评估,则是评估法律推理能力的有效方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Can Multiple Choice Exams Be Used to Assess Legal Reasoning? An Empirical Study of Law Student Performance and Attitudes
The purpose of this article is to examine whether legal reasoning skills can be appropriately assessed in a law degree, using multiple-choice question assessment. The use of multiple-choice assessment in university law schools is common, although not universally accepted as an effective pedagogical tool. In this article, both quantitative and qualitative empirical research methods have been adopted to examine whether the unique skill of legal reasoning is amenable to being tested through multiple-choice assessment. The position argued is that multiple-choice assessment, when properly constructed using identified guiding principles, is an efficient and effective way to assess legal reasoning abilities.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Legal Education Review
Legal Education Review EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
自引率
66.70%
发文量
7
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Computing Legal Analysis: A Guided Approach to Problem Solving in Contract Law Keep it Real: The Case for Introducing Authentic Tasks in the Undergraduate Law Degree Student Evaluations of Teaching: Understanding Limitations and Advocating for a Gold Standard for Measuring Teaching Effectiveness Trial Advocacy and Nitojutsu Legal Clinical Education in China: A Literature Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1