Degree | Type | Year | Semester |
---|---|---|---|
2500786 Law | FB | 1 | 1 |
You can check it through this link. To consult the language you will need to enter the CODE of the subject. Please note that this information is provisional until 30 November 2023.
There are no prerequisites.
'Instruments per a l'estudi' (Tools for studying) is a law degree first-year subject (first semester). This subject teaches students valuable tools for their legal training, such as information search, argumentation, oral and written expression, legal writing, etc.
These tools try to ensure that the student achieves skills that are not specifically legal. These skills, however, are essential for developing their training (search for legislation and jurisprudence, for example) and for the work of the jurist ( oral and written expression, writing of documents, etc.). On the other hand, students become familiar with information and legal and technological sources.
Regarding oral and written expression, will be held the following sessions: a session on how to speak in public, legal language, and legal argumentation. On the other hand, these skills will be put into practice with the realization of a "league of legal debate" among all the groups of Instruments for the study.
Finally, the aim is to provide students with a series of transversal skills necessary for acquiring their legal education.
The course is developed through a weekly session lasting three hours and a quarter (this time may vary in double degrees). Here is what sessions will be developed. The order of the sessions will vary depending on the group.
Annotation: Within the schedule set by the centre or degree programme, 15 minutes of one class will be reserved for students to evaluate their lecturers and their courses or modules through questionnaires.
Title | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|
Type: Directed | |||
Lectures and principal active participation of professor (Sessions 1, 2, 3 (two thirds) 4 (two thirds), 5, 8 (two thirds), 9 (half), 10 (half) | 19 | 0.76 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 8 |
Lectures and principal active participation of students | 20 | 0.8 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 8 |
Type: Autonomous | |||
Documentation and biblography search | 25 | 1 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 8, 9 |
Study | 20 | 0.8 | |
Work group out of classroom | 24 | 0.96 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 8 |
Writting and preparation of works | 30 | 1.2 | 1, 3, 4, 7, 10, 8, 9 |
SYSTEM OF EVALUATION OF THE ACQUISITION OF THE SKILLS AND SYSTEM OF RATINGS
The evaluation is based on the follow-up of the student's work throughout the course. Each activity (in or out of lessons) is evaluated and integrated into the final grade. Specifically, the different activities and works that make up the evaluation are the following:
Dossier on legal language: up to 1 point.
Exercise on methodology for the preparation of research papers and legal essays: up to 2 points.
Drafting practice of a legal text (written argument): up to 1.5 points.
Text commentary and critical analysis of a legal text: up to 1.5 points.
Exercise on study techniques and organization of study time: up to 1 point.
Training on legal databases and online resources (investigation of legislation, jurisprudence, and doctrine): up to 2 points.
Group work (legal debate / oral expression): up to 2 points
Exercises 1 and 6 are carried out outside the classroom and will be delivered electronically to the professor before the expiration of the terms established. The binding nature of deadlines is an essential characteristic of this subject. In the legal world, deadlines and their fulfillment are paramount; that is why in this course are only allowed to deliver an exercise after the deadline with a reason to justify this late delivery. In the same way, if a class work should be done on a specific day and, for whatever reason, that day the student can not, there is no way to recover from that exercise. This inflexible character is part of the education of the future jurist, who, from the beginning of his training, must be aware that deadlines are relentless. This inflexible nature of the terms is compensated to some extent by the fact that the total points that can be obtained are eleven and not ten. In this way, the student has a margin in case any circumstance prevents the realization of any of the evaluable activities.
On the other hand, during the course willbe carried out in class some activities that will be evaluated, and that will allow uploading of the student's grade in those cases in which the grade obtained through the programmed exercises is very close to the superior (one or two tenths). For example, if a student in the final computation has a grade of 4.8 but has satisfactorily completed most of these evaluable activities enclosed that are not part of the regular schedule, he could raise his grade to 5. Similarly, in the case of students who have a grade of 6.8 or 6.9, 8.8 or 8.9, the realization of these evaluable activities would allow them to reach the notable or excellent, respectively.
In cases where no work is delivered, or any exercise is performed, or they are given and/or perform one or two works or activities, the qualification will be "not presented." If three works or more are delivered, the qualification may no longer be "not submitted."
Works, practices, and other activities will be delivered within the maximum term established by the professor. None will be accepted after the deadline. To avoid server saturation problems, etc., having sufficient time before it runs out is recommended.
Compulsory attendance. The absence of a practice or activity in class can not be substituted by work at home because it alters its pedagogical objectives. For the reasons stated above, no proof of any kind (illness, driving test, etc.) will be accepted in case of absence.
Students who arrive late to perform a practice or activity can not do it.
Students who leave an activity, practice, or masterclass before completion are considered "not presented." For these purposes, the professor has the right to carry out attendance controls at the end of the event.
The students are informed that the evaluation of Tools for the Study is continuous. Therefore, there is no final exam or re-evaluation. This course does not foresee a single evaluation system.
Consequences of Fraud
A student who cheats or tries to cheat on an activity or practice will have a 0 as a mark. A Student who submits a paper o practical with evidence of plagiarism will have a 0 as a mark and will receive a warning. In case of repetition, the students will fail the subject.
Title | Weighting | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|---|
Documentation and Biblography Search | 18,5% | 2 | 0.08 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 8 |
Lectures and principal active participation of professor (Sessions 1, 2, 3 (two thirds) 4 (two thirds), 5, 8 (two thirds), 9 (half), 10 (half) | 14,81% | 2 | 0.08 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 8 |
Lectures and student active participation | 18,5% | 2 | 0.08 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 8 |
Study | 14,81% | 2 | 0.08 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 8, 9 |
Work out classroom | 18,5% | 2 | 0.08 | 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 8 |
Writting and presentation of works | 25,92% | 2 | 0.08 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 8 |
In class and through the Virtual Campus, the necessary information will be provided in each case, which will depend on the subjects that each student chooses to carry out the dossier of the legal news and the various topics proposed to carry out the argumentation exercises, university, and group work. The general bibliography of the course is the following:
Atienza, Manuel, Curso de argumentación jurídica, Trotta, 2013.
Beas Franco, Josefina, Santa Cruz Valenzuela, Josefina, Thomsem Queirolo, Paulina, Utreras García Soledad, Enseñar a pensar para aprender mejor, Ediciones Universidad Católica de Chile, 2003.
Bermúdez, Manuel, Lucena, Jorge, Manual de debate. Guía práctica para desarrollar tus habilidades en el debate académico y la oratoria, Editorial Berenice, 2019.
Bonomo Hernán, Mamberti, Juan, M., Miller, Jackson, B., Tolerancia crística y ciudadanía activa: una introducción práctica al debate educativo, International Education Debate Association, 2010.
Hermosillo Lozano, Judith, Albornoz Barrientos, Jorge, Manual básico del debatiente, Mar adentro, 2010.
Lucas, Stephen, E. The art of public speaking, McGraw Hill, 2011.
Swatridge, Colin, Oxford Guide to Effective Argument & Critical Thinking, Oxford University Press, 2014.
Toulmin, Stephen, E., Los usos de la argumentación, Península, 2007.
Turull, Max (Dir.), Tècniques de treball i comunicació. Instrumentarium per a les ciències socials i jurídiques. Huygens editorial. 2011 .
Web links:
www.westlaw.es
www.tirantonline.es
www.uab.cat
www.gencat.cat
www.congreso.es
www.senado.es
www.europa.eu
www.etc.uab.cat/ted
This subject doesn't use any software.