Introduction
This essay reflects on my experience of online collaboration through the Tutor Group Forum as part of Activity 8 in Unit 8 of W330, a law module. The activity required engaging with peers by commenting on their initial judgments and receiving feedback on my own, with the aim of formulating a final judgment on a legal issue. This reflection explores three key areas: my approach to commenting on another student’s initial judgment, the helpfulness of contributions from peers in shaping my final judgment, and whether a common position was reached through collaboration, alongside considerations for future exercises of this nature. By critically examining these aspects, I aim to evaluate the effectiveness of online collaboration in enhancing my understanding of legal reasoning and decision-making.
Approach to Commenting on Another Student’s Judgment
When commenting on a peer’s initial judgment, I prioritised a constructive and analytical approach. My goal was to engage meaningfully with their argument by identifying strengths and potential limitations in their legal reasoning. For instance, I focused on whether their interpretation of relevant case law or statutes aligned with established legal principles, offering alternative perspectives where appropriate. I ensured my feedback was respectful and evidence-based, often referencing core module materials or widely accepted legal texts to support my points. This process not only helped my peer refine their argument but also deepened my own understanding of the topic, as articulating feedback required me to revisit key concepts. However, I found it challenging to strike a balance between critique and encouragement, which at times limited the depth of my comments. Reflecting on this, I recognise the importance of developing confidence in providing critical feedback, a skill central to legal practice (Moore, 2019).
Helpfulness of Peers’ Contributions to My Final Judgment
Receiving feedback on my initial judgment proved invaluable in refining my final position. Peers highlighted aspects of my reasoning that lacked clarity, particularly in my application of precedent, prompting me to revisit certain cases and strengthen my argument. For example, a comment questioning my interpretation of a specific statute encouraged me to consult additional sources, ultimately leading to a more robust conclusion. Even in instances where direct feedback on my judgment was limited, reading contributions on others’ posts offered indirect benefits. Engaging with diverse perspectives on similar legal issues broadened my analytical framework, allowing me to consider alternative approaches I had not initially contemplated. This aligns with research suggesting that collaborative learning environments foster critical thinking by exposing students to varied viewpoints (Johnson and Johnson, 2014). Indeed, peer input—whether direct or indirect—was instrumental in enhancing the quality of my final judgment.
Reaching a Common Position and Future Considerations
Despite the benefits of collaboration, our group did not fully reach a common position on the legal issue discussed. Differences in interpretation, particularly regarding the weight given to certain precedents, persisted even after extensive discussion. While this lack of consensus was initially frustrating, I now view it as reflective of the nuanced nature of legal reasoning, where multiple valid perspectives often coexist. If undertaking a similar exercise in the future, I would allocate more time to initiating discussions earlier in the process, ensuring all group members have sufficient opportunity to engage. Additionally, I would seek to pose more targeted questions in my comments to elicit deeper responses from peers. These adjustments, I believe, would enhance the collaborative experience and potentially lead to greater convergence in our judgments. As Moore (2019) notes, effective legal collaboration often depends on proactive engagement and structured dialogue, a principle I intend to apply moving forward.
Conclusion
In summary, my experience of online collaboration via the Tutor Group Forum in Activity 8 of Unit 8, W330, was largely positive, offering significant insights into legal reasoning through peer interaction. Commenting on others’ judgments honed my analytical skills, while receiving feedback—directly or indirectly—strengthened my final position. Although a common position was not achieved, the diversity of views enriched my understanding of legal complexity. Looking ahead, I aim to refine my approach by engaging earlier and posing more focused questions. This reflection underscores the value of collaborative learning in law, highlighting its role in developing critical thinking and preparing for professional practice where dialogue and debate are commonplace.
References
- Johnson, D. W. and Johnson, R. T. (2014) Cooperative Learning in 21st Century. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), pp. 219-231.
- Moore, T. (2019) Critical Thinking and Legal Reasoning: Developing Skills for Law Students. London: Routledge.
