LWB 150 – LAWYERING AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION
SEMESTER 1, 2013
ASSESSMENT ITEM 1: INTERVIEW and REFLECTIVE ACTIVITY
RELEASED: Wednesday 13March 2013
DUE: Monday 22 April 2013 by 9.45 pm
ASSESSMENT VALUE: 40%
FOCUS OF INTERVIEW AND REFLECTION: Whether ADR should be a mandatory subject in the law degree
COMPONENTS OF THE ASSESSMENT: This assessment is made up of 2 components, Part 1 (conducting an interview with a legal professional / or watching interviews provided on the Blackboard site) and Part 2 (a reflection on the interview).
WORD LIMIT: The word limit for the words you write for this reflection is 3000 words. Headings are included in the word count. Footnotes are not included in the word count and should not contain substantive content.
GROUPS: This reflective practice assessment may be completed individually, or in groups of up to three students. It is our intention to give you a degree of choice as to how you complete this assessment. Where there is more than one student in a group, all students in the group receive the same final mark for their reflective piece. We encourage you to work in groups of three – experience has shown us that the group assignments lead to deeper and more thoroughly researched reflections.
SUBMISSION: Internal students are to submit via assignment minder and must alsoupload a copy of the assessment to the LWB150 Blackboard site. External students submit via the Blackboard site only.
INFORMATION ABOUT THIS ASSESSMENT:
- This component of your assessment in the unit provides you with the opportunity to demonstrate your capacity to reflect on an interview with a legal professional.
- This assessment relates to unit objectives 4 - 6.
- This assessment can be completed individually or in groups of up to three.
- This is a scholarly academic piece of work and you should demonstrate authority for views expressed by reference to scholarly authority, for example, through referencing journal articles, andthe prescribed textbook. Any authority you rely upon should be cited and footnotes should follow the QUT Law School Legal Referencing Style Guidelines or the Australian Guide to Legal Citation available at You may also research further than the materials already provided as part of the unit to inform your reflections. In class, we recommended the Heinonline database which is available through the QUT library website.
- Note that although lectorials and the study guide are not usually accepted as authority for scholarly academic work, they are accepted as authority in this instance for your reflections. This is because citing the lectorials or study guide will demonstrate connections between what you have learned in theory and your reflections on your experience of the practice of that theory. If you want to cite a lectorial or the study guide you can do so as follows:
For a lectorial, for example: Rachael Field and James Duffy, ‘LWB150 Lectorial 1’2013.
For the Study Guide: LWB150 Workbook, Semester 1 2013, (page number).
- Please use 12 point black font and 1.5 spacing.
- Please also refer to the criteria sheet on the Blackboard site for the criteria against which your answers will be assessed.
You are expected to use the 4Rs method for reflection in this activity. This method involves:
- Reporting the interview and responding to the experience of the interview by making observations, and identifying relevant questions for you to consider in relation to ADR as a mandatory subject in the law degree.
- Relating and making connections between the issues arising in the interview and your own skills, experience and knowledge.
- Demonstrating your understanding of the issues arising in the interview through analysis and reference to relevant literature.
- Developing ideas from the interview about your own future practice and understanding; for example,whether you believe that ADR will be relevant to your own future legal practice.
PART 1: CONDUCTING AN INTERVIEW WITH A CURRENT LEGAL PROFESSIONAL
The trigger material for your reflection is a 20 minute interview with a legal professional.
The legal professional can practice in any area of law and in any capacity but must identify as a ‘lawyer’.
The interview is focussed on exploring with the legal professional their own experience with respect to alternative dispute resolution processes, and their view about the place forteaching those practices in contemporary legal education. The interview will then inform your reflections on whether alternative dispute resolution should be a mandatory subject in current legal education.
It is possible for you to interview the legal professional over the phone or via email. Face-to-face interviews will probably be the most engaged, interesting and informative, however.
You should prepare your own questions to explore this issue. To get started, you might consider asking questions such as the following:
- What words would you use to describe the sort of lawyer you are?
- Did you study alternative dispute resolution theory or practice at law school?
- Do you currently use any alternative dispute resolution processes in your role?
- What do you see as some of the benefits of alternative dispute resolution?
- What are the downsides of alternative dispute resolution?
- Do you believe that law students should have to study ADR?
You don’t need to submit the notes from your interview, only the reflection that arises out of it.
If you are unable to access a legal professional to interview you can view some interviews that are available on the unit Blackboard site under Assessment and then Reflection – you should listen to a minimum of 20 minutes of interviews to inform your reflections. You also have the option to use the relevant aspects of the interview with John Anthony Hodgens from Gadens from the Week 4 lecture.
PART 2: REFLECTION ON THE INTERVIEW: (40 marks)
The aim of the reflection is to use the interview and what you have learned from it to inform your thinking about whether ADR should be a mandatory subject in the law degree.
Where this assessment is completed as a group, you should synthesise your perspectives and present them as far as possible as a group reflection. However, where there are different responses or analyses then these can be noted for individuals.
Your reflection should be structured in 4 parts to demonstrate the use of the 4Rs model of reflection which we have learned in class as follows:
Responding and reporting: This part of your paper is worth 5 marks and you should:
- Report on the interview discussions – that is,briefly summarise the questions asked and the answers given.
- Respond to the interview by making observations about it.
- Pose questions for yourself to address as a result of the interview in relation to whether ADR should be a mandatory subject in the law degree.
Relating and making connections: This part of the paper is worth 5 marks and you should:
- Make connections between the interview and your own skills, experience, and knowledge.
- Provide responses to the content of the interview against your existing impressions of the importance of alternative dispute resolution in legal education.
- Identifythe aspects of the interview that will inform the development of your own practice as a lawyer and whether alternative dispute resolution processes will be important to that practice.
Reasoning through demonstrating your understanding of the interview discussions through reference to the unit content and relevant literature: This part of your paper is worth 15 marks and you should:
- Highlight in detail the significant issues arising in the interview relating to ADR as a mandatory subject in the law degree.
- Explain and analyse their importance.
- Refer to relevant theory and literature to support your reasoning.
- Consider different perspectives – (eg theoretical or ethical) in relation to these issues.
Reconstructing through developing ideas for the development of your own professional identity as a result of the interview: This part of your reflection is worth 10 marks and you should:
- Explain how and why your own future practice as a lawyer will be informed by what you have learned through the interview.
- Elaborate on the steps you will take in the future to develop your own competency with respect to alternative dispute resolution processes. OR explain why you don’t think you need to develop competency in alternative dispute resolution as a law student.
- Explore why developing your skills in alternative dispute resolution may be important to your well-being as a lawyer.
Presentation and referencing: This aspect of your reflection is worth 5 marks. You should:
- Ensure your answer is very well written and proof-read.
- Ensure all references are correct in detail and footnotes are consistently styled using the QUT Law School Citation Guide or AGLC3.
END OF INSTRUCTIONS
1