‘Literacies’ might suggest a basic set of competencies, one that’s highly teleological, but I mean the very opposite of it — a complex unbounded, uncertain collection of capabilities, awarenesses and moral positions. Actually that’s really what literacy is in any case — a hugely complex process. As an adult education tutor many years ago I found myself learning again and again in one-on-one sessions and small group reading & writing classes just how complex it was, and how much of the process of learning literacy goes on unseen, hidden and largely forgotten, because most of us learn when we are quite young. As I point out in this post, helping adults to learn literacies was a profound experience because it went to the heart of many social and cultural as well as cognitive processes; and as Freire and others remind us, it’s a democratic and ethical necessity:
[click to continue…]
In her recent visit to Australian law schools Jane Ching of Nottingham Law School, a co-author of LETR, spent a week as a Visitor at ANU College of Law, and with PEARL staff in particular. We discussed how Nottingham Law School’s Centre for Legal Education could work closely with PEARL and with other legal educational centres; and we gave a joint seminar to a small but extremely well-informed (read, tough questions) audience on ‘Legal Professions and Professional Legal Education in England and Wales’, where we:
- discussed the shape of the legal services sector in E+W, including the roles of alternative business structures (ABSs)
- considered the emerging educational frameworks for the legal professions post-LETR (Legal Education & Training Review) report in June 2013
- compared the regulatory positions in E+W with aspects of professional legal regulation in Australia.
Our slideset is posted on Slideshare, and available at the Slides tab above.
What is PEARL, I hear you ask. All will be revealed tomorrow…