What kind(s) of evidence do we have about the impact(s) of clinic?Elaine Hall, with Tribe Mkwebu and Emma HallNorthumbria UniversityGAJE/IJCLE ConferenceAndalou University Eskisehir, Turkey

What have we got and how can we evaluate it?

• Why do we undertake inquiry?• The Fixation of Belief and ways to achieve this

• What do we mean when we talk about there being evidence?• Types of evidence and how they help to fix belief

• How is evidence used to make a case?• Argumentation theory, warrant and backing

• What’s going on in CLE research?• The systematic review• The maps• Evaluating the work

Peirce’s forms of inquiry

  Method of tenacity Method of authority A priori method Method of science

Description Currently held beliefs are defended

Normative beliefs are supported

Beliefs are explored through logical argument

Beliefs are explored empirically with the hypothesis that they contain something more than we currently understand

Reaction to new evidence

Dismissal Attempts to incorporate, if that fails, dismiss

Constructs arguments that are agreeable to reason

Weighs evidence against beliefs, logic and (iteratively) new evidence

Inquiry question

What do I already know about this?

What does my institution tell me about this?

How can I make sense of this?

What can this tell me about my doubt?

Limitation in fixing belief securely

Force of will must be stronger than external irritants

Belief and trust in the authority’s infallibility must be stronger than the external irritants

Apparently logical beliefs (e.g. that light and heavy object fall at different speeds) can be subject to socio-cultural constraints and therefore change over time

Certainty is acknowledged to be temporary, as all hypotheses need to be fallible and new evidence can always emerge

  Epistemic situation evidence

Subjective evidence Veridical evidence Potential evidence

Description Evidence that is understood within a particular cultural, historical or knowledge context

Evidence that is part of an individual or group belief structure

Evidence that transcends situations and beliefs

Evidence that is strongly related to experience, present and future

Requirement That the inquirer could construct or maintain H based on the E within the limitations of their context

That the links between E and H are held to be true and consistent by the inquirer(s)

The data supporting E need to be objective, although not necessarily complete (conclusive)

The data supporting E must be objective and rigorous and are understood not to be conclusive

Limitation This belief is not challenged by ideas from beyond the epistemic context

It is not necessary for any empirical elements to come into this inquiry

Both E and H need to be true (very hard to establish)

H may be false even where there is good E to support it

Link to beliefs The inquirer was justified in believing H on this E, in context.

The inquirer(s) believe that E is evidence for H, that H is true, E does not have to be empirically true, provided that it is believed.

E is evidence for H and provides a good reason to believe H, since both E and H are true.

E is evidence for H and provides a good reason to believe H until other E emerges to challenge

Relation to form of inquiry

The closed system of the epistemic context supports tenacity and may even inhibit the doubts that stimulate initial inquiry

There are clear links to tenacity and authority but the circularity of argument is a criticism also levelled at the a priori method.

There can be claims made for veridical evidence within the a priori method but the requirement for objective data implies a scientific approach

The concept of potential evidence only aligns with the method of science because of this fallibilist element.

The place of evidence in Toulmin’s argumentation and the impact on inquiry (from Kvernbekk, 2013)

Elision of warrant with evidence contains an

implicit desire for evidence to be at least

weakly veridical, creating a competition between data, privileging certain kinds and limiting the

form of inquiry

Observation/ Data (temporary) Conclusion

Warrant

Backing

Rebuttal

Placing evidence within backing enables each piece of data to be

understood as potential and thus each hypothesis as fallible within a

scientific method

What’s going on in CLE? (Mkwebu, in press)Database  Number of Hits  Retained as Potentially 

Relevant Westlaw   487 103 Hein Online   5798 518 Lawtel   23 7 LexisNexis   140 49 Web of Knowledge   2456 82 Total  8904  759 

What does my journal contain in terms of evidence?• IJCLE articles are • Interested in historical/ geographical comparisons in their literature

reviews, citing many of the same key references• Where focused on the ‘why’ of clinic, tend to be advocacy pieces:

• descriptive of societal representations of lawyers and/ or clinic or• descriptive of traditional/clinical approaches to disciplinary learning

rather than analysing data• counter-examples of critical policy or curricular analysis (e.g. Joy 2005;

Gold, 2015) • Where focused on practice, tend to be narratives (most use single

case study of author context) with a split between • focus on establishing and sustaining clinical activity, • student learning experience• Overwhelmingly positive stories

• Make overwhelming use of qualitative methodologies – most frequently the use of quotes from student feedback. Comparative methods and quantitative data are rare

So what does IJCLE mean when it talks about evidence?• We have epistemic situation and subjective evidence:

• Hypothesis: clinic is a worthy alternative to traditional teaching methods

• What we don’t have are veridical and potential evidence:

Our students in clinic learn the

law and do well, they get

jobs as lawyers later on

Learning by doing is better than simply reading about it

and our students say they are having a richer experience

Students of equal prior attainment randomly

assigned to clinic do better than students randomly assigned to traditional

conditions and all other factors are accounted for

Students with lower prior attainment in the degree do

better on the clinical elements and tend to get

overall more 2:1s than would have been predicted

Is this a developmental issue?Age and stage

 (Development models)Environment

(Schön)

This allows researchers to

The types of evidence produced can be identified 

This produces an inquiry with the tacit or explicit goal of

Instigation Childhood exploration of identity and environment

Hard, familiar ground

Set conditionsLimit the scope of the inquiry

(ES) V Fixation of belief by the shortest possible route

Collaboration Adolescence (identity seeking)

Swampy lowlands(no map or equipment)

Question the conditionsRecognise the boundaries of the inquiry

ES (V or P) Fixation of belief via scenic route (with souvenirs?)

Co-construction Adolescence (identity formation)

Discovery and use of (relatively) stable patches

Set the goal for the inquiryRe-imagine the epistemic space

ComplexES and P

Producing subjective evidence

Disruption  Adult peer- to-peer(identity fluid)

Preference for the swamp

Critique and justify the intent of the inquiryExperience dissonance and containment

Warrant for Action

Producing epistemic situational evidence

References

• Achinstein, P. (2001) The Book of Evidence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.• de Waal, C. (2013) Peirce: A guide for the perplexed. London: Bloomsbury• Hall, E. and Baumfield, V. (2014) ‘What do we (think we) know about

evidence?’ Paper presented as part of Network 15 Research Partnership in Education at the European Conference on Educational Research, September 2014, Porto

• Hall, E. (2009) ‘Engaging in and engaging with research: teacher inquiry and development’ Teachers and teaching: theory and practice, 15, 6, pp669-682

• Kvernbekk, T. (2011) ‘The concept of evidence in evidence-based practice’ Educational Theory, 61, 5, pp515-532.

• Kvernbekk, T. (2013) ‘Evidence-Based Practice: On the Function of Evidence in Practical Reasoning’ Studier i Pædagogisk Filosofi, 2, 2, pp19-33

• Mkwebu, T. (in press) A Systematic Review of Literature on Clinical Legal Education: A Tool for Researchers in Responding to an Explosion of Clinical Scholarship International Journal of Clinical Legal Education, 22, 3

• Peirce, C. S. (1877) ‘The Fixation of Belief’ Popular Science Monthly 12, November, pp1-15

• Toulmin, S. E. (1958/2003) The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press