This article aims to provide guidance regarding the design and/or review of community legal education programs. It is noted that there are many similarities in approaches taken to clinical legal education, both locally in South Africa and abroad, but there are also many differences. A review of the curricula of four South African university legal clinics was conducted in an effort to identify suitable models.
The author suggests that the level of success of a clinical legal education program can be determined by measuring it against an effective assessment regime. The assessment regimes of each of the four university legal clinics was examined in an effort to determine which assessment methods may be best suited for clinical legal education courses in South Africa. Potential methods of assessment are identified as:
1) Written tests;
2) Spot tests, minute papers, and short essay quizzes;
3) Multiple choice quizzes;
4) In-class short answer tests;
5) Written assignments;
6) Essay examination;
7) Oral examination;
8) Reflective journals;
9) Self-evaluation and peer evaluation;
10) Client evaluation; and
11) Case file work assessment.
Each of the above-mentioned assessment methods were found to be capable of being applied successfully with the exception of (6) essay examination and (10) client evaluation. It is suggested that essay examination may fail to successfully test the skills taught in clinical courses due to their open-ended nature. In relation to client evaluation, it is suggested that clients may view positive feedback as a condition of future service. As such, these two methods of evaluation are not recommended. One or a combination of the other assessment methods may be employed successfully in clinical legal education environments.
The author also identifies principles of assessment which ought to be taken into consideration regardless of the form of assessment or combinations thereof which are implemented by the clinic. These principles of assessment are as follows:
1) Be clear about the goals of each assessment;
2) Assess whether students learn what is taught;
3) Conduct criteria-referenced assessments, not norm-referenced;
4) Use assessments to inform students of their level of professional development;
5) Be sure assessment is feasible;
6) Use multiple methods of assessing student learning;
7) Distinguish between formative and summative assessments;
8) Conduct formative assessments throughout the term;
9) Conduct multiple summative assessments throughout the term, when possible;
10) Ensure that summative assessments are also formative assessments; and
11) Require students to complete educational portfolios (2790).
The author also identifies the importance of the mission of the clinic. As there is an interplay between the mission of the clinic and the chosen clinical legal education model, an effective model must be informed by and tailored to the mission of each clinic. It is posited that the mission of the clinic must be defined in clear terms, and that the mission will be the foundation on which subsequent student and institutional outcomes, curricula, teaching methods, and assessments will be conducted.
du Plessis, Riette, “Clinical Legal Education Models: Recommended Assessment Regimes” (2015) 18 Potchefstroom Electronic LJ 2778.