Utilizing Experiential Learning Methods to Teach Substantive Law Courses to Undergraduate Students
| Published date | 01 January 2024 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/23220058231175984 |
| Author | Anida Mahmood,Haswira Nor Mohamad Hashim,Zeti Zuryani Ahmad Zakuan |
| Date | 01 January 2024 |
Utilizing Experiential
Learning Methods to Teach
Substantive Law Courses
to Undergraduate Students
Anida Mahmood1, Haswira Nor Mohamad Hashim1
and Zeti Zuryani Ahmad Zakuan2
Abstract
This study proposes experiential learning methods for delivering and assessing substantive law courses to
undergraduate students. The study reviews current experiential learning methods used to teach contract
law, the most common substantive law course offered to law and non-law undergraduate students.
The identified methods are synthesized and mapped to Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle. The study
follows the PRISMA-ScR checklist and explanation guidelines to report its findings. A scholarly search was
conducted on Google Scholar and four online databases (ACM Digital Library, EMERALD, PROQUEST
and SCOPUS). Of the 44 studies that met the inclusion criteria, 141 essential original constructs were
collected, and 7 methods were derived. The study found that role-plays and simulation methods
recorded the highest percentage of original constructs (38%, n = 54), followed by fieldwork and clinical
methods (26%, n = 36), case-based methods (11%, n = 15), writing task methods (9%, n = 12), problem-
based learning methods (7%, n = 11), street law (5%, n = 7) and seminar-based methods (4%, n = 6).
The study also synthesized 23 new items for experiential learning methods that may guide the teaching
of substantive law courses to undergraduate students. This scoping review adds significant value to the
current body of knowledge by presenting novel items that law academics can use to adopt experiential
learning methods for teaching substantive law to undergraduate students. These items can also be adapted
for the development of experiential-based learning course syllabi and assessments for other substantive
law courses not included as a sample of analysis.
Background
Substantive Law Core Courses
Substantive law courses that teach the fundamental theories and principles of law are mandatory in law
Article
Asian Journal of Legal Education
11(1) 97–113, 2024
© 2023 The West Bengal National
University of Juridical Sciences
Article reuse guidelines:
in.sagepub.com/journals-permissions-india
DOI: 10.1177/23220058231175984
journals.sagepub.com/home/ale
1 Department of Law, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia.
2 Department of Law, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Arau, Perlis, Malaysia.
Corresponding author:
Haswira Nor Mohamad Hashim, Department of Law, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 40450 Shah Alam, Selangor,
Malaysia.
E-mail: haswira648@uitm.edu.my
98 Asian Journal of Legal Education 11(1)
students, such as jurisprudence, tort, equity and trust, family law, land law, criminal law and civil law and
3 Substantive law courses, including contract
4
Substantive law courses are distinguished from procedural law courses, such as criminal procedures,
procedural law courses are only taught in law schools.
conventional method of teaching substantive law courses involves large classes, often exceeding 50
students, and a frontal lecture-style delivery of content.5
large group of students, often using the doctrinal approach, while tutorials follow the Socratic-questioning
method.6
through case notes, which may exclude the practical complexity and human impact.7
separate and distinct from others.8
business, commercial and company laws; they are taught without integrating the theories and principles
silos of doctrinal courses. It does not adopt an experiential learning approach that prepares undergraduate
students for the complex and dynamic legal landscape of the twenty-first century.9 As a result, law and
non-law programme graduates often need help connecting the topics they studied in these isolated
courses to the complex and messy problems they face in the real world.
Although experiential learning methods have been in use since 1971, it was not until a decade later
that calls for formal implementation in law schools gained momentum.10 Advocates of experiential
11
Association also supports this idea, with their standards mandating six credit hours of experiential
3 L.S. Mullenix, Teaching Substantive Law to Undergraduates: The Pros and Cons, 54(3) 378
(2004).
4 R. Johnson & M. McMahon, Substantive Law Courses for Non-law Students: Benefits, Challenges, and Innovations, 10(1)
1 (2017).
5 G. Smyth, Bridging the Clinical-Doctrinal Divide: Clinician and Student Views of Teaching and Learning in Clinical Legal
Programs, in
Publishing Limited 2016).
6 J.R. Abrams, Legal Education’s Curricular Tipping Point Toward Inclusive Socratic Teaching, (9) . 897 (2021),
7 Langdell and the Foundation of Classical Contract Law, 70 459 (2022), https://heinonline.
8 N. Grossman, Legal Education and Interdisciplinary Problem-solving: Can Law Schools Learn from Business Schools67(2)
, 285 (2018).
9 M.H. Schwartz, The Interdisciplinary Imperative in Legal Education, 12(1) 1 (2012).
10 Radicalizing Law Students of the Eighties
11 Learning Like Lawyers: Addressing the Differences in Law Student Learning Styles, 2
499 (2006).
To continue reading
Request your trial