Transversal Competences in Legal Studies: A Summary of the Modernising European Legal Education (MELE) Project Survey Results

Abstract

The survey Transversal Competences in Legal Studies, carried out within the project “Modernising European Legal Education” (MELE), aimed to provide an overview of the trends in the development of the legal education in the members of the consortium. The survey focused on several different aspects of the curriculum development and its delivery. The key questions, to which the results are presented in this chapter, focus on the qualifications that are being developed as a result of the legal studies and the key transversal competences supporting those qualifications. The survey was carried out among the management and the teaching staff of the law faculties participating in the MELE project. The assessment of the level of development of specific qualifications at a certain level of studies versus the perception of the importance of the specific descriptor done by the faculty management has shown that the overall teaching goals are achieved to a significant extent but not completely. When it comes to the specific transversal competences, as assessed by the teaching staff, the development of the ones related directly to the legal profession such as competencies for legal synthesis, construction and communication of legal arguments are (still) high on scale of importance on all levels of studies. It is shown, however, that there is a discrepancy between the perceived importance of a transversal competence and the how or to which level the capacities are being developed in the course of the studies.

1 Introduction

Legal education is in a state of evolution. The changes that occur in the curriculum and the methods for its delivery are influenced by changes in the societies and legal frameworks on national, regional and international levels. The needs of the legal market change and the key question is how legal education should respond to them.

What is and what should be a priority in the legal education of a new generations of lawyers? How could and should legal education respond to those ever-changing needs? These issues were of importance for the project Modernising European Legal Education (MELE)¹ as it intends to enhance the transversal competences and academic skills of students by improving the teaching skills of academic staff among consortium partners. The first key question of interest was—how are qualifications as education goals being developed and are the teachers having the skills needed for achieving the education goals of the legal studies? The second question to be observed was—what the teaching staff finds as important to equip the students with in terms of the specific skills and to what extend this is found to be achieved?

Based on these questions the survey on Transversal Competences in Legal Studies was developed and carried out within MELE. The survey aims to establish the status quo on the development of the transversal competencies within the legal studies² offered by the consortium members. The information obtained was to further and support the project activities.

In development of the survey methodology, the researchers³ have taken into consideration the difference in the structure of the studies of the participating faculties (consortium members and faculties that come under the SEELS); different categories of staff employed/engaged by the faculties (academic staff and external teaching staff, young and experienced staff, level of the degree a staff member holds); the need to assess the level of importance versus the level of development of competencies and skills in different cycles of studies.

As a result, two questionnaires were developed: Survey on Transversal competences in Legal studies for the Faculty Management and Survey on Transversal competences in Legal studies for the Faculty Staff. The questionaries were disseminated among the faculty management and the faculty staff of the University of Saarland, Faculty of Law (Germany), University of Belgrade, Faculty of Law (Serbia), University of Zagreb, Faculty of Law (Croatia), Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, Iustinianus Primus Faculty of Law (North Macedonia), University of Cádiz, Faculty of Law (Spain), Mykolas Romeris University in Vilnius, Faculty of Law (Lithuania), University of Tirana, Faculty of Law (Albania), University of Rijeka, Faculty of Law (Croatia), University of Split, Faculty of Law (Croatia), Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Faculty of Law (Croatia), University of Niš, Faculty of Law (Serbia), University of Sarajevo, Faculty of Law (Bosnia and Herzegovina), University of Zenica, Faculty of Law (Bosnia and Herzegovina).

The Faculty Management Questionnaires provided data for the status quo on the 1st of October 2021. The Faculty Staff questionnaires were open for input in the period 15.07.2021–15.12.2021.

All of the faculties included in the survey provided responses to the Faculty Management Survey.

2 The Qualifications and Their Development as Perceived by the Faculties’ Management

The descriptors set in the Framework of Qualifications for the European Higher Education Area⁴ were used as a base for the assessment of the level of development of specific qualifications at a certain level of studies versus the perception of the importance of the specific descriptor as assessed by the faculty management. The faculties were asked to assess the level of importance of a specific competence⁵ for each cycle/level of studies. The survey, having in mind the specificities of the educational systems, recognised the following: First cycle—Bachelor’s level (typically includes 180-240 ECTS); Second cycle—Master’s level (typically include 90-120 ECTS credits, with a minimum of 60 credits at the level of the 2nd cycle) and Integrated studies (typically 300 ECTS or 10 semesters)/German state exam degree and third cycle or doctoral dissertation preparation (usually with 180 ECTS).

The qualification for the first cycle—bachelor’s level (typically includes 180-240 ECTS) were assessed by the faculty management of the participating faculties. The results show that there is a discrepancy between the perceived level of importance of development of the competencies and their actual development in course of the studies, however it is not seen as large. As seen in Table 1, on average it is found that for the first cycle of studies it is most important to develop skills to apply knowledge and understanding in a manner that indicates a professional approach to work or vocation, and competences typically demonstrated through devising and sustaining arguments and solving problems within their field of study. Still, although this skill is found to be of extreme importance the level of its development is assessed only as strong.

Table 1 Qualification from first cycle—Bachelor’s level

The data from the participating faculties⁶ regarding the importance of the set of qualifications for the second cycle—Master’s level (typically include 90-120 ECTS credits, with a minimum of 60 credits at the level of the 2nd cycle) and Integrated Studies (typically 300 ECTS or 10 semesters)/German state exam degree, finds all of them as extremely important (average above 4.5) while as the most important to be developed is the skill to communicate conclusions, and the knowledge and rationale underpinning these, to specialist and nonspecialist audiences clearly and unambiguously. Still, although extremely important, as shown in Table 2. This skill is not equally highly assessed on the scale for the level of development.

Table 2 Qualification from second cycle—master’s level/German state exam degree

When it comes to the qualifications (to be) obtained in the course of the doctoral studies [Third cycle—PhD (a typical number of credits is not prescribed for this cycle, it includes all forms for obtaining a PhD)] it is to be noted that the faculties⁷ management find the level of importance of the set qualifications much higher compared to the other cycles. At the same time, the discrepancy between the level of importance and the level of development is smaller on the overall level. From the set of qualifications, as presented in Table 3. It is found that it is most important to develop the ability to conceive, design, implement and adapt a substantial process of research with scholarly integrity. Simultaneously, this is considered very strongly developed as well as the ability to make a contribution through original research that extends the frontier of knowledge by developing a substantial body of work, some of which merits national or international refereed publication.

Table 3 Third cycle—PhD

3 The Transversal Competencies in View of the Teaching Staff

3.1 Demographics

A total number of 260 teaching staff⁸ members participated in the survey⁹ providing their insight and perception in the different topics. As presented in Table 4, from the total 234 or 90% are academic teaching staff members and 26 or 10% are external teaching staff. Having in mind the number of staff at the participating faculties—total 17.96% of the staff members participated in the survey, representing over 25% of the total academic staff and 5.01% of the total external teaching staff. The response rate of the external academic staff is considered low compared to the overall number of external teaching staff for relevant conclusive findings and comparisons based on the status of the staff.

Table 4 Teaching staff status

Most of the respondents, both the academic and external staff, are those who are considered senior teaching staff—those with experience over 10 years of experience constitute over 70% of the academic staff and over 80% of the external teaching staff as presented in Table 5.

Table 5 Respondents per years of teaching experience

In terms of the degree, both the within the academic staff and the external teaching staff, most respondents are those holding a doctoral degree, while less than 20% of the respondents are those having a master or a bachelor degree as seen in Table 6.

Table 6 Respondents per degree

When it comes to gender, as presented in Table 7, female respondents dominate, which reflects the overall gender structure at the faculties.¹⁰ Thus, total 56% or 142 of 260 respondents are female or as per their status 132 academic staff and 10 external staff. Total number of 110 respondents are male i.e., 40% of the academic staff respondents and close to 58% of the external teaching staff. Two members of the staff are non-binary persons and 6 prefer not to answer.

Table 7 Gender structure of respondents

The teaching staff participating in the survey usually teaches in more than one cycle/type of studies as presented in Table 8. Most of the respondents (25%) said that they teach on all three cycles of studies and 19% of them on integrated studies or equivalent, corresponding to the manner in which they are organized.

Table 8 Level of courses taught

The teaching staff who participated in the survey usually teach in more than one filed of the law, as seen in Table 9. Most of respondents teach in the field of Private Law (36%) while the least represented in the survey are the staff coming from the field of Criminal Law (10%).

Table 9 Legal fields

3.2 Importance Versus Development of Transversal Skills

Having in mind the different educational goals of the studies and the qualifications the students are expected to have at the end of a cycle of studies, a set of 20 competencies were selected and the teaching staff was asked to determine the level of their importance¹¹ and to which extent they are being developed.¹² They included both competences related to qualifications typically needed for the legal profession per se, but also competences that are beyond the traditional understanding of the legal profession in a closed national context.¹³

Teaching staff were asked to assess the level of importance and the level of development in the different types of studies where they deliver their courses.¹⁴ When analysing the results only the responses from teaching staff who deliver classes on the respective type/level of studies were taken into consideration as presented in Table 10.

Table 10 Respondents per level of studies

For the teaching staff in the first cycle of studies—bachelor studies—four of the 20 listed capacities are considered as most important to be developed in the first cycle of studies: capacity to construct valid legal argument (average 4.586), capacity for legal analysis and synthesis (4.582), oral/written communication of legal arguments (average 4.529) and critical and self-critical thinking abilities (average 4.505). Least important, although still high on the scale of importance having in mind the average score, is the ability to communicate with non-experts in legal field (3.874), ability to work in an international context (3.863), knowledge of a legal terminology in second language (3.816) and leadership skills (3.526). None of the capacities/skills is found to be developed “very strong” in course of the first cycle of studies (none has an average score over 4.5). One can consider as most developed with an average score above 3.7 (to be considered and strong in development) ethical commitment (3.812), appreciation of diversity and multiculturality (3.726), capacity for analysis and synthesis in general terms (3.720) and capacity for legal analysis and synthesis (3.715). The discrepancy between what is considered important to be developed and the perceived level of development in course of first cycle of studies is highest with one of the core competencies in terms of perceived importance. Thus, although the development of the skills oral/written communication of legal arguments is considered as extremely important (average score 4.529) one, the scale of development falls behind for one point with average score of 3.597 i.e., discrepancy of 0.932. The situation is similar for the capacity to construct valid legal argument and the capacity to apply the knowledge in practice. When it comes to the skills and capacities developed in the course of the first cycle of studies, as shown in Fig. 1, there is a discrepancy between the perceived level of importance and level to which they are being developed in course of the first cycle of studies.

Fig. 1

Importance versus development of a competence in first cycle of studies/bachelor studies

The second cycle of studies or the master studies aims to further develop the qualifications of the students. Again, the given competencies were assessed as highly important and in average could be considered very important.

When assessing the perceived importance of the set of skills for the second cycle one can notice an increase in the number of capacities/skills that could be considered as extremely important by the teaching staff (having an average score of above 4.5). In this group we have the capacities needed for the legal profession per se [capacity for legal analysis and synthesis (4.639), capacity to construct a valid legal argument (4.632) and oral/written communication of legal arguments (4.590)], the capacity for applying knowledge in practice (4.549), but also the more abstract ones such as the critical and self-critical thinking abilities (4.618) and the ethical commitment (4.510).

In terms of development of the set of skills, again there is none that could be considered as being strongly developed (none is above 4.5 in average). The number of those to be considered strongly developed [above 3.5 in average) is higher than in the first cycle of studies, but still over 3.7 as average score we have the ones related to the core competencies (capacity for analysis and synthesis in general terms (3.720) and capacity for legal analysis and synthesis (3.715)] and even with higher development of the soft skills such as the ethical commitment (3.812) and appreciation of diversity and multiculturality (3.726).

The outlook of the discrepancy changes for the second cycle master/studies compared to the first cycle both in terms of where it could be found higher and the values of the differences as may be seen in Fig. 2. Thus, for the second cycle of studies it is highest for the capacity for generating new ideas (0.720) that on its own merits is not found as extremely important to be developed. Still the discrepancy between the perceived level of importance and the level of development in the core legal profession capacities that are perceived as highly important is high.

Fig. 2

Importance versus development of a competence in second cycle of studies/master studies

The integrated studies of the first and second cycle are specific to the Croatian legal education system, recently introduced in Albania and the studies for first state exam are offered by German universities. Having in mind the specific educational goals that are to be achieved in course of the studies and upon their completion the position of the teaching staff on these studies in regard to the set of transversal skills was separately analysed. It is to be noted that compared to the other cycles the number of ‘no responses’ to certain questions is a bit higher. The priorities of importance in the integrated studies/German state exam studies in general do not differ as much as for the first and the second cycle of studies. The ones that are considered classical for the legal profession have precedent over the soft skills. Thus, capacity to construct a valid legal argument (4.690) and capacity for legal analysis and synthesis (4.676) are considered as most important, followed by importance for development of ethical commitment (4.609) and problem-solving skills (4.606). In terms of the development of the specific competences in course of the studies, those related to the legal profession or directly connected to performance of tasks of what is considered a traditional work of a lawyer, are considered to being more developed—capacity for legal analysis and synthesis (4.265), followed by capacity for analysis and synthesis in general terms (4.227), ethical commitment (4.191) and capacity to construct a valid legal argument (4.162). Discrepancy exists between the perceived level of importance and level of development; however, it is to be noted as seen in Fig. 3, that for those competencies which are considered to be core ones for the legal profession, this discrepancy is not as large as the one presented for the second cycle of studies.

Fig. 3

Importance versus Development of a competence in in Integrated studies/German First State Exam

The final stage of legal education is the doctoral studies or preparation of doctoral dissertation depending on the system. Whatever the approach, the system should equip the student/PhD candidates with knowledge and skills—qualifications expected for this level of education. As seen in Fig. 4, many of the listed capacities have very high importance for the teaching staff, in average higher than as the other cycles. The highest in importance for the doctoral studies is the development of the research skills of the students (4.892), understandable when having in mind that one of the key qualifications the doctoral studies should provide are those related to research capacities. Development of the capacities for analysis and synthesis both specific for the law (4.865) and in general terms (4.861) follows, together with the perceived importance of development of critical and self-critical thinking abilities (4.851) and ability to work autonomously (4.822). In general, it is noted that higher number of the set transversal skills are considered to be highly important (with average score above 4.5) than the other levels of studies. When it comes to perception of the development of the set of skills, it is also to be noticed that teaching staff find that in doctoral studies a higher level of development of the capacities is achieved when compared to the other cycles. Thus, very strong development of the critical and self-critical abilities is achieved (4537) and the number of ones that are strongly developed is higher, including capacity for analysis and synthesis in general terms (4.37), capacity for legal analysis and synthesis (4.362) and research skills (4.304). Still, as presented in Fig. 4, discrepancy exists between the perceived level of importance and the achieved level of development of the set of skills.

Fig. 4

Importance versus Development of a competence in third cycle/PhD studies

4 Conclusions

The research carried out among the faculty management has shown that the qualifications intended to be achieved in course of the studies in different cycles is achieved to a great extent.

The survey carried out among the staff shown that there is a discrepancy between a competence considered important and the level to which it is developed in the given studies in all of the cycles of studies. There are differences between which competence is considered specifically important for a given cycle of studies. Overall, the competencies related to the specificities of the legal profession (such as but not limited to legal analysis and synthesis and construction of legal argument) are found as most important for all level of studies. Still, at the same time it is found that the perceived level of their development does not match the perceived level of their importance by the teaching staff.

When the set of skills is analysed from the perspective of the position of each skill for the different level of studies, both how they are perceived in terms of their importance and the level to which they are developed, two tendencies are observed:

• The importance of each of the specific capacities rises with the rise of the level of studies. Rise in the level of development could also be observed in the course of the studies. As seen in Tables 11 and 12.

  Table 11 Capacity per level of studies

  Table 12 Development per level of studies

• The classical capacities for the legal profession—legal analysis and synthesis, construction of valid legal arguments and their communication are considered as highly important for all levels of legal education by the teaching staff. It is also considered, by the teaching staff, that they are being strongly developed in the course of the education.

The survey reflects the positions of the faculties and teaching staff as to what are the key transversal competencies that the students should develop during the course of the studies. The mechanisms for involvement of the legal professionals in the development of the curriculum and their delivery exist at all faculties, however, it cannot be established with certainty to which level the curriculum addresses the needs of the legal market and if the needs for development of specific sets of transversal competences are met. Further analysis of the positions of the students and the legal professionals in terms of what is to be considered important and to which level is developed in their experience will provide for a more comprehensive overview. It will address the extent to which is legal education is providing what is expected and needed for the contemporary legal market.