In the developed, technocratic world people—especially younger generations—became accustomed to virtual realities on PC screens. Interactive PC games offer excitement, insight and fulfilment. Clinical simulations could offer similar stimulus, engagement observation how law works. Brayne, Duncan and Grimes (1998: 173) state aptly “doing law as means to learning about law is different from learning the law by reading it”. Reconstruction of legal incidents through the vehicle of simulations; and the presentation of social problems as law ‘cases’; are but two examples. A legal problem on paper does not contain the uncertainties, emotions and interactions that form part of the real-world realities of, for example, the attorney’s office, the police station or the courtroom.
Brayne, Duncan and Grimes (1998: 174) observes that “simulation is commonly regarded as a valuable part of clinical teaching, but one which is the poor relation of the real-client clinic”, because simulation lacks the “startling and awakening encounters … of coping with people” present in legal practice “who have a need of legal expertise”. On the other hand, simulations can provide opportunities not readily available and can invoke the emotions and flow of adrenalin associated with daily client work.
In undergraduate legal education, simulations would inculcate appropriate behaviours in addition to the realisation that there is more to lawyering than mastery of legal knowledge. Simulations further offer students safe opportunities to experiment and to learn from mistakes.
Brayne, Duncan and Grimes (1998: 183) emphasise that simulation can never be an alternative to real client work, but within a spectrum of teaching methods simulations could contribute to effective law learning.
Brayne, H; Duncan, N & Grimes, R. 1998. Clinical legal education: active learning in your law school. London: Blackstone.
Comments