The underpinning of my philosophy of teaching was best expressed ...

Alastair HudsonQMULnearly 40% in the May exams. This had been a course feature for some time since aformer lecturer had attempted to impose a conceptual organisation for the coursewhich was supported by no textbook and which, by way of example, required everystudent to access a single copy of a textbook held on weekly loan in the library forone particular tutorial.I restructured the course so that early tutorials followed on explicitly from the casereadingskills element of the foundation course. This gave students greater continuityfrom their foundational studies. It also increased their confidence by putting their coreskills to work. The course was further reorganised around one of two recommendedtextbooks and easily accessible cases. The initial course topic in the rearrangedprogramme – on the distinction between leases and licences – was deliberatelychosen because it: was rich in case law (so that each student could prepare a casethemselves to present in tutorials); was the easiest three-part rule on the course (andso easy for an first-year student lacking in confidence to assimilate) and it began thelearning process with a general topic (i.e. the law of leases) the subject matter ofwhich is much more accessible than, for example, the abstractions of landregistration. When aggregated these improvements increased student progressionrates to nearly 80% in subsequent exams without jettisoning any of the morechallenging material.My approach to curriculum structureMuch of the success of a law course lies in its structure, just as the success of astory lies in the order and the manner in which it is told. In structuring law courses, Ibegin with fundamental theoretical concepts which are illustrated by comparativelyeasy technical ideas to generate student confidence and momentum. Progressionthrough the course is then dependent on acquiring a greater volume of technicallegalprinciples and theoretical perspectives, and moving through increasinglyconceptual and abstract ideas which build on earlier threshold concepts. Thisfacilitates student’s momentum through progressive levels of achievement.When writing for students and structuring university programmes of study I invariablybegin with foundational principles and add, layer-on-layer, more complex ideas whichlearners need to absorb in order to reach a level of attainment necessary for theintellectual integrity of the course. This approach to the acquisition of higher orderthinking skills has a sound, proven foundation in cognitive learning theory (Ausubel,D et al 1978 Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View). By contrast, when writingfor practitioners, one approaches these issues in a conceptual order that is lessconcerned with imbuing the reader with skills.I have developed systems of assessment, support and feedback including: ‘commonproblems with essays’ documents; suggested solutions; lecture support of seminars;visual, tick-box assessment forms organised by skills exhibited in the assessment;and so forth. I undertake a large amount of problem-answering and essay-writingwork in lectures to illustrate the skills which the students must develop. In part this ismotivated by questions of equity and a desire ‘to level the playing field’ betweenstudents who are taught in seminars by part-time teachers and those who are not.The same is true of my podcasts.The effectiveness of the approach is evidenced by the large number of students whoprogress from this mode of study into conducting research in these fields by way ofan optional, dissertation course under my supervision.Page 5 of 10