The Law Teacher - Institute for Law Teaching and Learning

epeat Performances and Learning by Transfer
By Daniel L. Nagin, University of Virginia School of Law
each time we teach a particular
course, or a specific topic within
a course, we get better at it. Each
time we present the same paper at a
workshop or conference, we get better at
presenting that paper. (Or at least, these
are our hopes.)
Why do we get better? Because on
our own, or with the help of others,
we identify what went wrong, what
was successful, and then we make
adjustments going forward. True, we
may sometimes improperly evaluate
what went well and what went poorly,
but on balance we are always heading—
or trying to head—in the direction of
improvement.
what of our
students?
how many
opportunities do
we give them to
get very good
at something by
doing that very
same thing over
and over? In
some respects, it
may be that we
do a superb job on this front, as students
receive multiple opportunities to test
their ability to decipher appellate cases,
structure an argument, interview clients,
and so on. With proper self-reflection
and feedback, students should improve
each time they perform a skill—just like
their professors.
But let me also suggest that students
might especially benefit if we gave them
more opportunities to do what their
professors do: to engage in a particular
kind of repetition, what I will call a
“repeat performance.” allow me to
explain by way of an example.
I was working with a second-year
student who was assigned to represent
a client in an appeal hearing regarding
the client’s eligibility for unemployment
6 | The Law Teacher | FaLL 2012
insurance benefits. It was the student’s
first hearing of any kind.
The student prepared for the hearing
in a number of different ways. For
the present purposes, let me focus on
the final stages of certain trial skills
preparation. after drafting and editing
his direct examination, the student
practiced his direct examination with
the client. The student then participated
in a simulated hearing during which he
practiced his direct examination again,
as well as his cross examination and
closing argument. he then practiced his
cross examination and closing argument
additional times.
with each successive performance, the
With proper self-reflection and feedback,
students should improve each time they
perform a skill—just like their professors.
student improved. along the way, the
student had engaged in self-critiques
and had also received feedback from
his supervising attorney and student
colleagues. he made adjustments,
kept the good, threw out the bad, and
incorporated new ideas as necessary.
One could say that the student learned
from repetition.
at the hearing itself, the student
performed reasonably well. But, as is
true for many law students at their first
hearings, there were a few bumps in
the road. In particular, the student’s
closing argument was not as strong as
would be ideal. afterwards, the student
reflected on what had worked in the
closing argument and what had not, and
I provided feedback as well.
Ideally, the student was now poised to
take what he had learned in his first case
and apply it to the next case to which he
was assigned. Specifically, because it was
the area most in need of attention, the
student was presumably poised to put
to the test in his next case the important
lessons he had learned about closing
argument.
None of this should sound strange. This
is what clinical professors—and, in a
different context, all law professors—
strive to do every day. This is known
as teaching for transfer, which is
intended to produce learning by transfer.
Psychologists tell us that transfer occurs
when a student learns a particular skill,
applies that skill in a given context,
and then,
later, applies
that skill in
a different
context. By
applying the
skill in the new
context, the
student will be
more likely to
internalize and
master the fundamental elements of the
skill. clinical law scholars and others
have developed a rich literature about
the importance of learning by transfer for
legal education.
In my student’s case, a funny thing
happened on the way to transfer—that
is, something happened before I assigned
my student a new case and gave him an
opportunity to test his skills in a new
case. even though the hearing in the
first case was over, we revisited the case
again. I tried something I had not done
before. I asked the student to prepare
his closing argument for the case yet
again, this time in light of his experience
at the hearing and the feedback we had
generated afterwards. and I asked him
to deliver this revised closing argument
— continued on page 7