Embedded Files
Overview
Overview
Elective for political science majors
an examination of the major participants (lawyers, judges, juries, interest groups) in the court system and the structure and rules in criminal and civil trial and appellate proceedings.
Taught Spring 2021
Pedagogical Approach and Course Evaluation
Pedagogical Approach and Course Evaluation
PSCI 2120: Judicial Process is an elective for political science majors that examines the U.S. legal system through an institutional and behavioral lens. The course focuses on key actors in the judiciary—judges, lawyers, juries, and interest groups—as well as the structures and rules that govern criminal and civil proceedings at both trial and appellate levels. I taught this course in Spring 2021 with a pedagogical emphasis on bridging theoretical knowledge with the practical functions and professional norms of the U.S. judicial system.
The course followed a logical progression, beginning with the structural and constitutional foundations of the judiciary, moving through procedural dynamics, and concluding with appellate review and the role of the U.S. Supreme Court. Each unit built toward an applied understanding of legal processes and professional practice, culminating in a collaborative mock trial experience.
Key topics included:
The organization and jurisdiction of federal and state courts
Judicial selection and appointment mechanisms across jurisdictions
The differences between criminal and civil law, and respective procedural frameworks
The role of judicial behavior, precedent, and the influence of interest groups
Professional pathways into legal practice, including law school and legal ethics
Assessment Structure:
To assess student learning and reinforce the connection between legal theory and practice, the course incorporated a blend of traditional and experiential components:
Three exams, each consisting of five short-answer questions, tested students’ knowledge of legal actors, institutional processes, and court procedures.
Assigned readings, including a textbook, peer-reviewed articles, constitutional excerpts, and multimedia content (such as Anita Hill’s testimony), provided foundational and contextual understanding of judicial behavior and legal authority.
Mock Trial: Students assumed the roles of attorneys, jurors, and witnesses in a simulated trial. This capstone project integrated content from the entire semester and gave students practical experience in trial procedures and courtroom strategy.
Mock Trial Journal: Students maintained a written journal documenting their trial preparation, legal reasoning, and personal reflections on the experience of legal simulation.
Guest Panel: I organized a Zoom panel featuring recent law school graduates and practicing attorneys, offering students firsthand insights into legal education, career paths, and the ethical dimensions of legal practice.
Student Learning Outcomes:
Understanding the constitutional basis of American law
Understand the background of legal professionals and the process of law school
Articulate the organization of courts in the United States.
Discuss the process of judge selection
Differentiate civil and criminal law
Understand the process of a trial with experience in a mock trial
Course Evaluation:
Spring 2021 data based on 3 student responses
Student Feedback on Instructor:
Students found the instructor knowledgeable and well-informed but suggested a need for greater patience, empathy, and understanding of student circumstances.
Student Feedback on Course:
Students appreciated the course content and instruction but recommended more flexibility, including access to lecture slides, recorded sessions, and clearer communication around class expectations.
Evaluation of Course:
This semester presented significant challenges in terms of student engagement and participation. Class attendance was consistently low—at times, only 3 out of 20 students were present—and many students were unprepared for discussion, having neither completed the assigned readings nor watched required videos. In one instance, not a single student viewed a video assigned outside of class, resulting in an unproductive class session.
In response to this lack of preparation, I removed lecture slides and guided notes from the course to encourage students to engage directly with the readings. This change was met with resistance and became a major point of critique in student evaluations. To further address disengagement, I implemented a cold-calling strategy during discussions to promote accountability and ensure participation. While several students cited lingering pandemic-related stressors as a reason for their disengagement, I found it increasingly difficult to maintain a rigorous and meaningful classroom environment when students were frequently absent or unprepared.
Despite these obstacles, students responded enthusiastically to the course’s experiential learning components. The mock trial was a particular highlight, offering students a hands-on opportunity to apply course concepts and better understand courtroom procedures and legal roles. Similarly, the professional panel with practicing attorneys and recent law school graduates generated thoughtful student questions and helped demystify career pathways in law.
This course reinforced the importance of integrating frequent, structured check-ins and in-class assignments to help students stay on task. It also underscored the value of applied learning in enhancing student engagement. Moving forward, I plan to expand the use of legal simulations, incorporate more case-based learning, and explore partnerships with local legal organizations or moot court programs. These enhancements will provide students with deeper insights into the judicial process and better prepare them for careers in law, public service, or legal advocacy.
Grade Distribution:
The grade distribution for the Spring 2021 class is heavily skewed toward higher performance, with 8 students earning A’s and another 8 earning B’s, making up the vast majority of the class.
Only 4 students received C’s, and no students received D’s or F’s, meaning every student passed with at least an average grade. T
his pattern suggests a low level of grade differentiation and may point to lenient grading standards, less rigorous assessments, or a particularly strong cohort of students.
The lack of lower grades and the high concentration of top marks could raise concerns about grade inflation or whether the course effectively challenged students across the performance spectrum.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse