On Friday 22^nd October, I delivered a 2-hour lecture on Debentures and Trust Deeds to my Law of Corporate Finance Class of third year undergraduate students. It is the first of two lectures on Debt Financing. My teaching style in this lecture can be described as intermediate transitional[1] as I imparted new knowledge in the lecture, while students participated in developing their thoughts on the topic by answering questions. I will reflect on my approach by using Rofle’s model to critique my integration of BOPPPs.

What?

The instructional activities included a review of the stock simulator competition that students are currently participating in. This was the bridge in as it interests the students to see how they are doing compared to their classmates. It was suitable for this lecture as students need to compare equity financing which they have been studying, to the topic of debt financing. I then conducted a pre-assessment by asking what they think debt financing is, and a student was able to give a definition by distinguishing between debt and equity financing. I think I was successful in encouraging participatory learning in this lecture as I asked questions and received answers from students by microphone and in the chat. I also asked the students questions that could be answered by reference to earlier lessons so that scaffolding could be employed.

So what?

I did not prepare learning objectives for this lesson. On reflection, such preparation is valuable as it can help me keep on track and make the students clear as to what they should take away from the lecture. In the future, I will include learning objectives for each lesson. That being said, I recognize that I used elements of BOPPPS as described in my learning activities above. Since this lecture is one of two on this topic, I will conduct a post assessment in the next lecture. I have planned a summary as I have included a slide which links the various forms of debt financing that we would have looked at (see Figure 1). This appeals to visual learners and will also ensure that the two aspects of the topic are connected.

This lecture was better received than when I taught it last year. Previously, the lecture was dry as I failed to engage the students effectively. This was due to my own bias as I think the topic of equity financing which precedes this topic is more exciting. However, I realized that I needed to improve, so I included examples of debt financing such as Massy’s capital risk management from their 2020 annual report, Digicel’s inability to pay back debenture holders, and the failure of CLICO. I also encouraged students to think beyond the traditional models by drawing their attention to Wimbledon’s issuance of debentures for prime court seats. This aligns with my goal of creating forward thinking students who can modernize Caribbean jurisprudence in the corporate sector, and engages the ‘create’ level of Bloom’s taxonomy which is appropriate for these final year students. Students were much more engaged this year as evidenced by the increased use of the chat, reference to situations that they were aware of, and thoughtful questions which demonstrated critical thinking about the material. I think this was due to my improvement of relating the concepts of debt financing to real life examples and examining the relationship between debt and equity financing.

Now what?

To improve future teaching and learning, I will include learning outcomes, and a summary for each lecture, even when it is part of a broader topic. I will also conduct a post- assessment. I do this sometimes, but I neglected to do so in this lecture as I ran out of time. If I had prepared a BOPPPS plan I would have been more aware of my time management. I ask questions throughout the lecture, so I will use a different activity to make the post-assessment more enjoyable. My students enjoy competitions. I will use a game such as a quiz that allows the students to work in teams. The game will evaluate their application of knowledge and allow the lecture to end on a high note. I will also integrate concept mapping after covering a few topics so that I can gauge whether the students are seeing the connections in the course.

I think that this was a decent lecture. I have actively been integrating my CUTL learnings into practice, particularly ensuring that I engage my students throughout the lecture, but I could have done this more in the Trust Deeds section of the lecture. I can improve by utilizing BOPPPS and gamification. This will enhance participatory learning and improve my time management of the class.

BBC link to lecture: https://ca-lti.bbcollab.com/recording/cbcf8ac32929499f8de71366bf860489

[1] Cy Fresto, ‘Concepts of Teaching’ YouTube < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWyV1WSL5pY? Accessed 26.10.21.

The course I have focused on for CUTL5106 is the Law of Trusts. It is a course that I have been teaching for four years. While I pride myself on trying to make improvements annually, on reflection, I have been focusing on content rather than delivery, which is arguably just as important. In past years, I would lecture and have discussions in class. During the pandemic, I have been using polls and the whiteboard on BBC. I have also started requiring two students to direct tutorials and one student to scribe by sharing their screen and taking notes for the class.

After receiving feedback on my course plan, I decided to integrate more technology into this course. I have used padlet for students to share their thoughts on questions during class. I have also used team quizzes which students seemed to enjoy. These synchronous activities have been well received, but I am doubtful as to how asynchronous activities will be received. I used a forum for students to interact with each other on set questions, and provide peer feedback. Less than 10% of students participated.

I appreciate the new technological tools that can enhance learning, but I do not think the LLB is set up to make the best use of such tools. With 5 courses per semester, and multiple pieces of coursework, the reality is that students primarily focus on assignments that contribute to their final grades. I will continue to use technology for synchronous sessions as tools such as Quizziz and Kahoot make the class fun and encourage greater participation. Unfortunately, I do not see students participating widely in asynchronous activities that require additional preparation. Perhaps they will benefit from screencasts as they enjoy having lecturers recorded, but they are unlikely to engage if they are required to divert time from their marked assignments outside of synchronous sessions.

Overall, I have found CUTL most useful because I have been exposed to different modes of practice, technology, assessment styles, and rubrics. I have started using analytic rubrics for all my courses, and I tried gamification which was well received by the best students (and disliked by the less diligent). Unfortunately, I think the full benefits of CUTL for students are difficult to recognize under the rigidly timed semester system where the focus is invariably on grades instead of lifelong learning.

I have only taught undergraduate students thus far, but I hope to teach graduate students in the new academic year. My students are generally aged 18 - 21. Each year marks a significant difference in the capabilities and expected competencies of students. These differences were difficult for me to reconcile at times as it meant that I need to ensure that final year students are becoming more self-sufficient, first year students will require some spoon feeding, and second year students are in between. I used to be afraid of not covering enough material in class for all my students. While I definitely spend a lot of time explaining concepts in great detail to my first years, I now expect third years to be able to grasp material more quickly and figure out things independently. They need to develop these skills and an authentic course requires me to probe students more intensely rather than feeding them material.

In addition to their skill levels, from looking at course feedback and taking CUTL, I have realised I should be doing more activities in class rather than simply lecturing using power points. There are other tools such as quizzes, games, and research activities that can be used. In my equitable remedies class, I have tried different methods: asynchronous forums, rap challenge, case race (research key elements of a case in class then present), and a timed quiz. Due to the heavy course load at UWI, that in my opinion, focuses on quantity instead of quality, students are not very willing to engage in activities that require preparation outside of class time. As such, I will continue to use activities that can be done with little preparation. There are a select few who will put in the extra effort, so for those students, I will host debates. I find this benefits both the speakers and the listeners. I collaborated with my colleague in UWI Mona and hosted a debate on the Jury System in my Law and Legal Systems class in 2021. Students really enjoyed interacting from their peers on their peers on other campuses and the debate format encourage them to develop and critique arguments, thus enhancing their skills of critical analysis.

I was one of the first lecturers to transition to the online environment in UWI. When the University announced on a Friday that the campus would be closed from Monday, I did not hesitate to set up my virtual classroom, and had my Law of Trusts lecture at 2:00 pm on the Monday. I have found that there are advantages and disadvantages to the online environment.

Advantages

Students are more willing to participate in large lectures. Generally, students are shy in large lectures, and some of my larger classes have between 160 - 220 students. The chat function eradicated shyness as students enjoy responding in the chat. Those who do not like the chat can hide behind the anonymity of a poll and still participate. However, students are still generally hesitant to speak, which is concerning considering speaking is a vital skill in any profession, but particularly in the practice of law.

Internet problems are inevitable, but, I actually prefer lecturing from home because my internet is more reliable than the campus internet. I am able to show YouTube videos and play sound clips in class. This makes for a much more interesting use of media.

I like being able to use the onscreen whiteboard. Usually, I do not have working markers in my teaching rooms.

Unfortunately, some of these advantages are simply indicative of the shortcomings of campus infrastructure.

Disadvantages

I cannot see students faces as we do not use cameras. We do not have enough bandwidth to support use of cameras, and students have expressly objected to this use due to many having shared spaces, or coming from impecunious backgrounds. As such, we are not meant to ask students to put on their cameras. This makes it difficult to read their feelings, but I encourage them to use the feedback button.

Tutorials do not work well online. Students should be working in groups to answer tutorial questions but there are always technical problems with the breakout rooms. In person, I would walk around the various groups and see how they are progressing. I check in the break out rooms but it is difficult to connect to the students in the same way that I do in person.

Students are not getting the social interaction that is part of the university experience.

General reflection

I think online teaching actually enhances the delivery of lectures. It is not something that I would enjoy as a student as I do not like looking at a screen for long hours, and I find using a laptop offers too many distractions, but many of our students seem to prefer it. However, tutorials cannot be executed properly online. Students need to see each other in person to work effectively and exchange ideas. As such, online learning can complement in person learning, but should not replace it. If campus infrastructure improves, I will continue to use some online tools in physical class to have a more interactive learning environment.

In our Entertainment Law Class 2022 (Jan - April 2022), my colleague and I decided to try the flipped classroom method. I explained what this would entail to students in Academic Advising. I advised that students would have to read all provided material before class, and come prepared to engage in an interactive discussion. They would be free to ask questions on the subject matter, but the principles would not be taught in class. Rather, they would be applied. I think this approach requires students to be very hands on. This is not something our students are accustomed to. The enrolment for the class was 14 students compared to 40 - 60 in previous years. However, I am pleased to say this is the most engaging, enjoyable class I have ever taught.

Students come to class prepared every week and are always willing to contribute. We have a class padlet where students post entertainment law news. This padlet was heavily utilised and students often got into their own debates about how issues should be approached. When we presented situations to students, they were able to apply the law that they had learnt throughout the LLB, and consider the practical implications. In fact, students often came to class and raised issues that they would like to discuss for the topic at hand. One student even brought in a sample contract that the class was able to critique.

We had three guest speakers for this class this semester: MC and promoter Major Penny, Producer and Artiste First Klase, and lawyer for crowd management and the Travis Scott Astroworld litigation, Steve Adelman. Steve gave a lecture on US law as it applied to crowd management (we teach common law which is rooted in the UK system) and students were apply to apply the principles to situations he presented them with. In the sessions with Major Penny and First Klase, students were given free reign to interview our guests on issues they faced in entertainment law. The questions were insightful, relevant, and more advanced than they had been in previous years of teaching this course.

On reflection, I think the flipped classroom should replace traditional teaching for some courses. Entertainment Law is ideal because students should be familiar with many of the relevant areas of law based on their past courses. However, some courses should be taught in the traditional manner with flipped classes nearer to the end when students understand enough of the information. In addition, flipped classes are better for more advanced students. I would recommend this approach for second year second semester students onwards as they are in the second half of their degree. However, second year classes in law usually have over 150 students, and I think a smaller class is more suitable for an effective flipped classroom. This is because I think all students need to get a chance to participate, as they did with the 14 students in entertainment law. I would use this method for classes of under 35 students to ensure the interaction is equitably distributed.

Co-teaching is something I have been trying to encourage at UWI, with little success due to limited staffing. I co-teach Entertainment law, but I think both lecturers and students could benefit from co-teaching. I have seen 'co-teaching' where lecturers divide a course in half, but do not attend the same lectures. What I mean by co-teaching is that both lecturers should be present and engage in discussion with each other as well as the students. I think this would be beneficial because students could learn about different perspectives and understand how to raise counterarguments in a professional setting. In addition, combining the expertise of two lecturers can expose the students to a broader range of knowledge. This practice would also be helpful as lecturers can give each other feedback on their teaching. I have found it to be a worthwhile practice in Entertainment law and I hope I can do this in other classes. It is beneficial for classroom management as well as the learning experience.

I have only co-taught with a colleague I know quite well, so I am unsure what the experience would be like with a colleague that I do not know. I hope I can have this experience on the future so that I can return to this reflection and share my thoughts.

My learners generally range from age 18 - 22 but there are a handful of mature students. They are excited to learn when they enter first year but some of them feel overwhelmed early on. They come in with what a conception of a law degree is like based on tv and movies, but quickly realise this is not the case. Many do not possess the necessary writing and language skills to succeed. This is a flaw of the high school system, and it is difficult to correct. In light of this difficulty, I have redesigned my first year course to take a skills based approach which is cumulative. Students tend to help each other learn in the tutorial setting, and I support this method of learning by asking them how their friends can improve.

By third year, students are more confident. Those who like law are still excited to learn whereas others are just trying to graduate. Students still try to help each other but within their friendship groups. Since students are more advanced, I allow them to lead tutorials so that they can become more independent and engaged in the learning process. By this point, they know what is expected, and I provide guidance where necessary. I allow them to sign up to be 'tutorial directors' and 'scribes'. I have realised that students prefer to work with a friend rather than lead a class individually, so I allow them to choose their partner. The scribe takes notes for the class and distributes them after. I think this is a worthwhile experience because students have to prepare to lead, and it also gives them a different perspective and appreciation for the tutorial leaders. Many students have expressed that it was much harder to direct a class than they anticipated, but they found it worthwhile because they were able to understand how different students think.

Alverno College’s approach to assessment is learner centered. Class sizes of 20 – 25 students allow for an individualized approach to be taken with in-depth feedback, but it would be difficult to transfer this methodology to a larger environment. I am unclear as to how the absence of grades would be received by employers, or by other universities for students who wish to further their education. I cannot imagine that disposing of a grading system would be acceptable in any professional field, like law.

I theoretically support the idea of constant, in-depth feedback. In my earlier days at UWI, I was dedicated to this, but I found it was difficult to manage in my large classes. My smallest class was International Mooting, with only 8 students. I was able to engage in the type of feedback that Alverno uses and required my students to conduct weekly self-assessment in class and provide peer feedback. While grades were provided, they were only given at the end of the course, and the grades were based on the improvement of students throughout the year. However, this course was unique as it focuses on oral and written advocacy skills opposed to retention and application of legal knowledge.

It is also the case that grades are an important marker of achievement in law. Employers need to be able to objectively distinguish between applicants, particularly due to the saturated nature of the legal job market. Furthermore, the study of law requires competency in pre-determined compulsory courses set by the Law Association. Thus, Alverno’s model of only recording courses that the student has achieved competency in is inapplicable to the field of law. The use of grades facilitates the objective comparison of one applicant versus another. Alverno’s model may be useful for liberal arts degrees where subjectivity is involved, but it is not suitable for the LLB where external validation is necessary for accreditation.