学术界的小公众:法律教育中的协商民主与本土文化能力的实验

IF 0.7 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Legal Education Review Pub Date : 2019-03-01 DOI:10.53300/001c.7595
A. Wood, R. Levy
{"title":"学术界的小公众:法律教育中的协商民主与本土文化能力的实验","authors":"A. Wood, R. Levy","doi":"10.53300/001c.7595","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this short article we report on a novel consultation event held in 2017. Fifty-two Indigenous and non-Indigenous legal academics convened in Melbourne to draft and promulgate standards to be followed by law schools across Australia for promoting Indigenous cultural competency. The consultation took the general form of a mini-public. A mini-public is a decision-making body whose members are randomly selected from – but demographically representative of – a broader public. Public decision-making by mini-publics is now routine. Yet ours was a distinctive variation, in that the mini-public purported to represent not the whole public of a jurisdiction, but only a particular professional class within it – in this case legal academics in Australia. We convened this mini-public of legal academics in order to give greater legitimacy to the promulgated guidelines for cultural competency in law school curricula.\n\nThe article explores the content of the consultation, centring on its suggestions for improved breadth, content and quality of legal teaching, as it touches the lives of Indigenous people. Most of all, however, the article assesses the unique use of a mini-public to represent an unusually small and highly formally educated public. We generally rely here on our own qualitative observations about the novel consultative process and its methods.","PeriodicalId":43058,"journal":{"name":"Legal Education Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Mini-public of Academics: Experimenting with Deliberative Democracy and Indigenous Cultural Competency in Legal Education\",\"authors\":\"A. Wood, R. Levy\",\"doi\":\"10.53300/001c.7595\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this short article we report on a novel consultation event held in 2017. Fifty-two Indigenous and non-Indigenous legal academics convened in Melbourne to draft and promulgate standards to be followed by law schools across Australia for promoting Indigenous cultural competency. The consultation took the general form of a mini-public. A mini-public is a decision-making body whose members are randomly selected from – but demographically representative of – a broader public. Public decision-making by mini-publics is now routine. Yet ours was a distinctive variation, in that the mini-public purported to represent not the whole public of a jurisdiction, but only a particular professional class within it – in this case legal academics in Australia. We convened this mini-public of legal academics in order to give greater legitimacy to the promulgated guidelines for cultural competency in law school curricula.\\n\\nThe article explores the content of the consultation, centring on its suggestions for improved breadth, content and quality of legal teaching, as it touches the lives of Indigenous people. Most of all, however, the article assesses the unique use of a mini-public to represent an unusually small and highly formally educated public. We generally rely here on our own qualitative observations about the novel consultative process and its methods.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43058,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Legal Education Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-01\",\"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.7595\",\"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.7595","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

在这篇短文中,我们报道了2017年举行的一次新颖的咨询活动。52名土著和非土著法律学者在墨尔本召开会议,起草并颁布澳大利亚各地法学院应遵循的标准,以提高土著文化能力。咨询采取了小型公众的一般形式。小型公众是一个决策机构,其成员是从更广泛的公众中随机选择的,但在人口统计学上具有代表性。小型公众的公共决策现在已成为惯例。然而,我们的是一个独特的变化,因为小型公众声称代表的不是司法管辖区的整个公众,而是司法管辖区内的特定专业阶层——在本案中是澳大利亚的法律学者。我们召集了这个法律学者的小型公众,以使颁布的法学院课程文化能力准则具有更大的合法性。文章探讨了咨询的内容,重点是其对提高法律教学的广度、内容和质量的建议,因为它涉及土著人民的生活。然而,最重要的是,这篇文章评估了小型公众的独特用途,以代表一个不同寻常的小型和受过高等正规教育的公众。在这里,我们通常依赖于我们自己对新颖的协商过程及其方法的定性观察。
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
A Mini-public of Academics: Experimenting with Deliberative Democracy and Indigenous Cultural Competency in Legal Education
In this short article we report on a novel consultation event held in 2017. Fifty-two Indigenous and non-Indigenous legal academics convened in Melbourne to draft and promulgate standards to be followed by law schools across Australia for promoting Indigenous cultural competency. The consultation took the general form of a mini-public. A mini-public is a decision-making body whose members are randomly selected from – but demographically representative of – a broader public. Public decision-making by mini-publics is now routine. Yet ours was a distinctive variation, in that the mini-public purported to represent not the whole public of a jurisdiction, but only a particular professional class within it – in this case legal academics in Australia. We convened this mini-public of legal academics in order to give greater legitimacy to the promulgated guidelines for cultural competency in law school curricula. The article explores the content of the consultation, centring on its suggestions for improved breadth, content and quality of legal teaching, as it touches the lives of Indigenous people. Most of all, however, the article assesses the unique use of a mini-public to represent an unusually small and highly formally educated public. We generally rely here on our own qualitative observations about the novel consultative process and its methods.
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