7.4 Conclusions and Caveats

The ICE model is portable and flexible and can be adapted to a variety of applications within a single course. It is easy to explain.  Students can use it effectively after only a brief introduction.   And it works well for encouraging students to pay attention to their learning process, which is a necessary step in becoming a self-regulated learner. Without follow-up surveys, it’s difficult to say whether students have continued to incorporate this model as a tool for reflecting on their own learning and tracking their development as early-career lawyers.  Nevertheless, within the context of the course, the ICE framework proved to be easy to use and readily accepted by students as a way of talking about their learning.  To me, this seems like a good step toward helping students become more self-aware, self-directed learners and helping them build and rebuild a robust legal research skillset for use during and beyond law school.  

References

Bloom, E. (2017). Creating Desirable Difficulties: Strategies for Reshaping Teaching and Learning in the Law School Classroom. University of Detroit Mercy Law Review, 115, 117

Callister, P. (2012). Time to Blossom: An Inquiry into Bloom’s Taxonomy as a Hierarchy and Means for Teaching Legal Research Skills. Law Library Journal, 102(2), 191.

Callister, P. (2014). The Metacognitive Imperative. The Boulder Statements on Legal Research Education: The Intersection of Intellectual and Practical Skills, 25.

Davis, L. (2013). Teaching Advanced Legal Research in a Flipped Classroom. Perspectives: Teaching Legal Research and Writing, 22(1), 13

Santangelo, J. and Gundland, J. (2019). Teaching and Assessing Metacognition in Law School. Journal of Legal Education <https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3371946>

Schwartz, M. (2003). Teaching Law Students to be Self-Regulated Learners. Law Review, 447.