Online Undergraduate Trial Advocacy Training in Malaysia During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Abstract

One of the significant challenges in legal education during the coronavirus pandemic 2020–2022 was effectively conducting remote practical advocacy courses. This article addresses that issue by reporting results of a study conducted of final-year undergraduate law students taking part in a civil trial advocacy course conducted over two semesters, as part of their regular studies in their degree course. Candidates were surveyed at the conclusion of their studies on issues including what technology students used to take part in the course, technological issues encountered as part of their studies, whether they perceived that remote training was inferior or superior to in-person training, and what were their attitudes to specific issues in the remote course on advocacy including witness cheating, making objections, team cooperation, sharing of workload and assessment of student participation and performance. The survey results have validated the author’s hypothesis that in-person trial advocacy training provides better training than a remote course. However, none of the five supposed limitations of remote training were validated. In fact, for many students, specific aspects of the remote course were viewed as conducive to better student training or at least reducing the practical inconvenience of some aspects of in-person advocacy training. This provides some reassurance to educators that remote training provides an effective, if slightly less preferable, mode in which to teach practical advocacy. This is encouraging when it seems that remote advocacy in the legal profession appears likely to remain a feature of legal practice indefinitely. Based on the salutary information received from the study, it is recommended that legal educators periodically conduct such voluntary surveys for the remote teaching of skills-based courses