Year: 2000
Type: article
Abstract: Remember those horror movies in which somebody wearing a hockey mask terrorizes people at a summer camp and slowly and carefully slashes them all into bloody little pieces? That's what first year of law school is like. professor has a black belt in an ancient martial art called the method. ' After professor completely dismantles a student for sheer sport and humiliates several dozen others, he then points out forty-seven different things in two-paragraph case that you failed to see and still don't understand. [Many students] spend most of their time wondering what hey is going on, and why don't professors just tell us what law is and stop playing hide ball and shrouding law in mystery/philosophy/sociology/nihilistic relativism /astrology/voodoo/sado-masochistic kung fu?1 I. INTRODUCTION If education were known for nothing else, its pedagogical claim to fame would undoubtedly be widespread use of a unique method of classroom instruction bearing cryptic moniker: The Method (or, if you prefer, Socratic kung fu). method is so entrenched in modern American pedagogy that a law school just isn't a law school without method.2 As above tongue-in-cheek caricature attests, popularity of method in education has made it subject of numerous jokes, parodies, and humorous personal anecdotes. Some, however, are not laughing.3 Among unamused are a rising number of scholars who have challenged methodological foundations of method. These scholars claim that emperor's clothes are in fact imaginary garments that have been fabricated and perpetuated by methodological swindlers.4 They have joined students who have attacked method as infantilizing, demeaning, dehumanizing, sadistic, a tactic for promoting hostility and competition among students, self-serving, and destructive of positive ideological values.5 In recent years, liberated voices of feminist scholars have joined in imperial exposure and have revived debate over continued vitality of method in law school classrooms. These scholars have raised additional concerns regarding method as it specifically affects female law students.6 This Comment explores vitality of method in light of newly raised concerns of feminist critics. Part II defines method and summarizes history leading up to its adoption as primary methodology for education. In addition, Part II sets forth rationales generally proffered to justify teaching. Part III discusses general criticisms leveled against teaching. Part IV focuses on women's entrance into profession, with specific attention given to implications of this entrance for education. Part IV also discusses results of recent studies that probe accusations that method creates or exacerbates gender differentials in education that adversely impact female law students. Part IV concludes with an evaluation of method as viewed through lenses of various feminist theories. Part V considers continued vitality of method in education and explores contours of a modified methodology that accommodates feminist criticisms in a way that humanizes teaching without undermining fundamental benefits of method. Part VI provides a concluding summary of analysis and recommendations addressed in this Comment. II. BACKGROUND A. What Is Method?-Definitions and Descriptions 1. Origins of legal use of method origin of term Socratic method, as used in context, has generally been attributed to Christopher Columbus Langdell, Dean of Harvard Law School and (in)famous originator of case method. …
Author: David D. Garner
Institution: Brigham Young University
Language: English
Subfield: Law
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W68305602