our seminar. The diversity in topics covered and the traditions we chose to study led us to reach an interesting middle ground. My students understood that all legal traditions had to be subject to interpretation and had to develop some adaptive qualities in order to be sustainable. For my part, I saw stability and a great sense of justice in religious law, understanding that divinity was not a synonym of arbitrariness. I like to believe that I was successful in constructing a more pluralist legal mind for my students and myself thanks to an unconventional teaching environment that seemed more favorable to the development of different perspectives on the law. My students proved to me that their ability to the law” or to how to think the law” was much “learn “learn greater when constructing their own legal understanding of concepts derived from multiple sources. In order to replicate this method we must, as lecturers, find a place for the constructivist approach in our traditional law schools and apply it across the curriculum to better teach comparative law. Indeed, varied teaching approaches are more likely to reach a greater number of students. Legal educators trained through untraditional environments will prepare future lawyers to complex work environments and raise their awareness to a set of skills they need to develop as future counsels. It is now time for legal academia to change its point of view on the teaching of law and relay the valuable contribution of untraditional teaching approaches. For this prisons are ideal microcosms that challenge young academics. Diversity in the student body as well as the unusual setting of the facility can expose a new comparative dimension to the teaching of many legal topics. TRADITIONAL COMPARATIVE LAW TEACHING A case can certainly be made for comparative law in any law teaching institution. The sense of open-mindedness inherent to this subject liberates students from the narrow confines of their national legal systems. It is also right to believe that work of “[t]he comparing laws and institutions is very necessary, for the only way to perceive any object clearly is to compare it with something else.” Thus, taking a closer look at the initial goals set forth by European faculties and American law schools for comparative law teaching in
our seminar. The diversity in topics covered and the traditions we chose to study led us to reach an interesting middle ground. My students understood that all legal traditions had to be subject to interpretation and had to develop some adaptive qualities in order to be sustainable. For my part, I saw stability and a great sense of justice in religious law, understanding that divinity was not a synonym of arbitrariness. I like to believe that I was successful in constructing a more pluralist legal mind for my students and myself thanks to an unconventional teaching environment that seemed more favorable to the development of different perspectives on the law. My students proved to me that their ability to “learn the law” or to “learn how to think the law” was much greater when constructing their own legal understanding of concepts derived from multiple sources. In order to replicate this method we must, as lecturers, find a place for the constructivist approach in our traditional law schools and apply it across the curriculum to better teach comparative law. Indeed, varied teaching approaches are more likely to reach a greater number of students. Legal educators trained through untraditional environments will prepare future lawyers to complex work environments and raise their awareness to a set of skills they need to develop as future counsels. It is now time for legal academia to change its point of view on the teaching of law and relay the valuable contribution of untraditional teaching approaches. For this prisons are ideal microcosms that challenge young academics. Diversity in the student body as well as the unusual setting of the facility can expose a new comparative dimension to the teaching of many legal topics. TRADITIONAL COMPARATIVE LAW TEACHING A case can certainly be made for comparative law in any law teaching institution. The sense of open-mindedness inherent to this subject liberates students from the narrow confines of their national legal systems. It is also right to believe that “[t]he work of comparing laws and institutions is very necessary, for the only way to perceive any object clearly is to compare it with something else.” Thus, taking a closer look at the initial goals set forth by European faculties and American law schools for comparative law teaching in
Sabrina%20Germain%20Final%20Revised%20Version%20Law%20%26%20Method.docx