Abstract
This paper examines the cross fertilisation of ideas about interactive teaching from law to
physics and back again. In particular it considers the origin, legacy and merits of Langdell’s
teaching model and the way it has been used by a physics professor, Eric Mazur, to support
arguments for what is commonly known as the ‘flipped classroom’. It examines the
similarities and differences between Langdell’s and Mazur’s approaches and the adoption
by some law teachers of Mazur’s model. It also considers how this phenomenon bares out
a thesis advanced by educationalist Lee Shulman that when it comes to teaching, both
professional and liberal disciplines are pursuing many of the same ends. Finally it considers
the implications of adopting Mazur’s approach for the discipline of law and issues some
words of caution.
physics and back again. In particular it considers the origin, legacy and merits of Langdell’s
teaching model and the way it has been used by a physics professor, Eric Mazur, to support
arguments for what is commonly known as the ‘flipped classroom’. It examines the
similarities and differences between Langdell’s and Mazur’s approaches and the adoption
by some law teachers of Mazur’s model. It also considers how this phenomenon bares out
a thesis advanced by educationalist Lee Shulman that when it comes to teaching, both
professional and liberal disciplines are pursuing many of the same ends. Finally it considers
the implications of adopting Mazur’s approach for the discipline of law and issues some
words of caution.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 520-542 |
| Journal | Legal Studies |
| Volume | 37 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Sept 2017 |
| Externally published | Yes |