Building Critical Thinking Skills Through Psycho-legal Analy sis Karyn Sprague McKenzie, Ph.D. Georgetown College Classroom Activity for Students A) View a video clip in class (case study) B) Consider content as a judge or juror might C) Analyze their thoughts and beliefs about the legal aspects D) Decide how they personally would resolve topics: Guilty of a crime? 1) If no, why not? 2) If yes, why? What’s an appropriate sentence? Introduction One of educators’ most important goals is developing students' critical thinking skills (Bloom & Krathwohl, 1956). Students can do this by examining personal beliefs about course topics' legal aspects. Finkel and Moghaddam (2005) differentiate between black letter law (legal statutes) and common sense justice (intuitive beliefs about what is fair, what laws should be). The two are not always identical. For example, active euthanasia is illegal in most states. One student may think doctors who perform it are not guilty of any crime, because individuals have rights to die with dignity. Another may think these doctors should spend their lives imprisoned, based on the Hippocratic Oath's "keep others from harm" (Edelstein, 1943). Allowing students opportunities to consider how they personally would resolve controversial psycholegal topics allows them to probe their beliefs, instead of merely memorizing topics' legal status. References Bloom, B. S., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, by a committee of college and university examiners. New York: Longmans. Edelstein, L. (1943). The Hippocratic Oath: Text, translation, and interpretation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press. Finkel, N. J., & Moghaddam, F. M. (Eds.) (2005). The psychology of rights and duties. Washington, DC: APA. 400 E. College Street, 259; Georgetown, KY Methodology During the semester, students watch eight clips of controversial issues, including executing the mentally ill and child eyewitnesses. (Written case studies could be used instead.) Students imagine they are judges or jurors and write their assessment of what the verdict and corresponding punishment (if any) should be. Sometimes videos include the case's legalities and outcomes; sometimes students write without knowing relevant laws or outcomes. I summarize students' papers' verdicts (guilty, not guilty) and punishments (e.g., ten years imprisonment; no punishment). The next class, I distribute summaries of their peers' perspectives and lead a discussion based on them. This allows even reticent students to participate "on paper," even if they don't speak during class. Outcomes Assignments are graded on logic, clarity, organization, grammar, and punctuation. Discretionary points are given for creativity. Grades earned are usually A's and B's. Survey data reveal students find the assignment beneficial. For the question "The writing assignments enhanced my understanding of class material", students' average ratings were 4.77 and 4.68 (of 5.0) the past two years. For "The writing assignments enhanced my intellectual skills", average ratings were 4.79 and Potential Benefits Students: 1) gain critical thinking and analytical reasoning skills; 2) possess an improved appreciation of course content applications; 3) appreciate hearing others' viewpoints, which provides opportunities to more thoroughly question their beliefs and perhaps change their stances; 4) realize the difficulty inherent in creating "fair" laws and how difficult it can be for juries to reach consensus; 5) are grateful for fun, engaging opportunities to demonstrate material mastery. The Next Class A) Summarize responses Simple tally format: - Guilty: 14 - Not guilty: 10 Written responses - Parents can choose for themselves whether they want treatment. They cannot choose for their children, if their children’s lives are at stake. - There is no greater right than that of religion. If people are following their beliefs, that must be respected. B) Break up into juries and deliberate - try to reach a unanimous decision C) Share actual legal status / outcomes Topics in My Courses Faith healing Vigilantism Death penalty Executing the mentally ill Involuntary homicide Active euthanasia Children eyewitnesses Legal ages for marriage