How Can Law Librarians Most Effectively Provide Legal Research Training?

Abstract

The proliferation of digital legal resources over recent years has profoundly changed the way in which lawyers carry out legal research. Law librarians have had to adapt rapidly to these new ‘disruptive technologies’ and have had to develop new ways to train their users in how to carry out the most effective legal search. As a consequence, training has become an increasingly important role of a law librarian. The literature shows that these issues have been much discussed, but often confined to either the academic sector, or to the role of the law librarian in a law firm. Over the past few years, the concept of information literacy has increasingly been seen as a way of developing more effective legal research training programmes. This study, conducted by Steve Mishkin*, examines the views of law librarians working in both the academic and non-academic sectors, regarding how to deliver legal research training most effectively. The study concludes by recommending greater cooperation between academic and non-academic law librarians and suggests that both need to make the case for the benefits of legal research training, in order to win support from their management for better resourced programmes. It also suggests that the quality of legal research training will be improved if law librarians themselves are provided with training, on how to deliver it most effectively.

New Barristers’ Information Literacy Challenges as They Transition from Education to the Workplace

“…Some find it difficult to recall it in detail and/or insisted they did not have much training, an issue highlighted in the literature review (Travis, 2011). Although the effectiveness of IL training is often discussed in the literature (Fishleigh, 2013;Woellhaf, 2017;Gow, 2013;Mishkin, 2017), this study found that the provision of useful IL training is complicated by issues such as the differences between practice areas and the varying skills levels of students and new barristers. Furthermore, if new barristers feel they do not need training or cannot participate because of work duties, the effectiveness of the training provided by the Inns is a secondary concern.…”

“…Gow (2013) highlights the uncertainty many barristers feel around legal research and their perceived lack of IL training. In his large study, Mishkin (2017) examines how legal research training can be done most effectively, although he focuses entirely on law librarian perspectives, albeit from different settings. While he discusses provisions at educational, vocational and professional levels, neither he nor any of the above-mentioned studies address the question of transition or how law librarians and legal IL generally can help new professionals transition into the workplace.…”

Artificial Intelligence in Legal Practice: Exploring Theoretical Frameworks for Algorithmic Literacy in the Legal Information Profession

“…In his literature review and empirical study, Mishkin (2017) 81 examines the question of how law librarians working in both academic and non-academic sectors are able to deliver legal research training most effectively. The research results in six recommendations, two of which may be extracted to form a dual-pronged approach for algorithmic literacy training in legal environments: first, a greater collaboration between academic and nonacademic law librarians in designing learning objectives, curricula, and supporting learning activities geared towards legal technology and increasing algorithmic Kitchin (2017) 82 similarly delves into critically thinking about and researching algorithms from the perspective of teaching and academic institutions.…”

“…With much underway in the field of artificial intelligence, there exists a need for research libraries to act, beginning with the clarification of artificial intelligence scopes, limitations, ethics, policies, principles, and practices. While both Ridley and Janoski-Haehlen write from academic perspectives, Mishkin (2017) 91 notes the greater co-ordination and cooperation required between the academic and non-academic legal sectors to ensure that law students, as information users, are being instilled with the legal research skills they need to practice with algorithmic competency. The initiatives discussed are largely from academic instructional contexts but may be modified to organizational or professional settings.…”

“…This may present an opportunity for legal information practitioners to demonstrate value by integrating algorithmic literacy into advanced legal research training and to prepare future legal practitioners for the increasing number of technological tools in this area. Mishkin (2017) 101 highlights how law librarians are required to rapidly adapt to new technologies and how training has become an increasingly important role for law librarians. Mishkin also states that that the quality of legal research training will be improved if law librarians themselves are provided with training on how to deliver it most effectively.…”