I\u2019ve been in this justice education game for a while now. I\u2019ve participated in programming for thousands of students, in classrooms, courthouse and communities.\u00a0 While developing this wealth of experience I\u2019ve frequently contemplated the question of whether feedback or evaluation given by justice sector volunteers (\u201cJSVs\u201d -lawyers, judges and justices of the peace) is appropriate and meaningful.\u00a0 JSVs are not educators, nor are they trained in effective assessment for a youth audience.\u00a0 Youth participants are not made aware of the evaluative criteria in advance, and the content is difficult to judge because it\u2019s so subjective.\u00a0 Take for example a mock trial program – I mean, just because you won your mock trial does not mean you\u2019re the better advocate and stylistically what appeals to one judge may not appeal to another.\u00a0 Don\u2019t even get me started on how our personal lens or preferences colour our opinions on what makes an effective advocate.\u00a0 If the purpose of experiential programming is to learn through the experience, why do we need to bother giving feedback at all? Wouldn\u2019t it be better to just allow the learning to occur?\u00a0 Questions, questions, questions!<\/p>\n
In Mystery of Iniquity<\/em> Lauryn Hill sang that the \u201croad to hell is paved with good intentions\u201d. Okay, so Lauryn wasn\u2019t the 1st to say that. The saying dates back to around 1150, attributed to Saint Bernard of Clairvaux (1091-1153) who said, loosely translated \u201chell is full of good intentions or desires\u201d.\u00a0 Where was I going with this\u2026oh yeah, sometimes \u2013 well intentioned volunteers shower program participants with praise that is absolutely unwarranted, and the youth know it.\u00a0 So now you have a young person that has not prepared, or made any effort (besides attending which, on its own is a great thing in some cases but that isn\u2019t the issue at hand) being told they were excellent, and did a great job.\u00a0\u00a0 What\u2019s the message here?\u00a0 What if another student has worked really hard and then gets similar feedback \u2013 is it as valuable? Does that instil trust? Is the bar really that low? It\u2019s not the JSVs\u2019 fault really, they want to be encouraging, don\u2019t want to call people out, sometimes they just genuinely don\u2019t know what to say in these circumstances.\u00a0 Maybe it\u2019s our fault, should be we providing training for our JSVs on what how to give feedback?<\/p>\n As many times as I\u2019ve seen feedback go wrong; I\u2019ve also seen it be amazingly effective.\u00a0 When I started at OJEN, my training included attending a variety of mock trials. In one program youth from one of Toronto\u2019s priority neighbourhoods were presenting in a mock trial with Justice Kofi Barnes presiding.\u00a0 Prior to the mock trial getting started, the courtroom was chaotic; the young person playing the accused and his defence team were intimidating the witnesses. One witness was refusing to participate, he was close to tears. Youth workers scurried around dealing with behaviour issues and comforting\/reassuring participants. The courtroom was clouded in nervous energy and I wondered how this pandemonium was going to transition into an orderly mock trial.\u00a0 Sure enough, everyone calmed down and when Justice Barnes entered the room the proceeds commenced.\u00a0 The Crown was prepared and polished.\u00a0 The defence ill equipped and under prepared, so much so that the accused, abandoned the script and became a hostile witness to his own counsel<\/em>.\u00a0 The trial ended and Justice Barnes gave his judgement.\u00a0 He then followed up with feedback.\u00a0 He referred to every participant by name.\u00a0 He spoke about the specifics, citing examples and even including some quotes based on proceedings. He turned the accused\u2019s actions into a teachable moment, commenting on credibility, trust and importance of the relationship between the accused and the defence. The Crown team was praised for their preparation, understanding of the legal issues advocacy and theory of the case.\u00a0 Justice Barnes remarked that if they chose, they would be welcome addition to the legal profession in future years.\u00a0 Then it was time for the defence \u2013 I cringed wondering how he would address this team.\u00a0 What I saw next amazed me.\u00a0 Like he did with the Crown, Justice Barnes asked each young person to stand up as he gave them their feedback.\u00a0 The first young man (let\u2019s call him Mark) stood, head hung low and slouching.\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0Justice Barnes then acknowledge that he could tell by Mark\u2019s performance that he had not spent a lot of time with the materials.\u00a0 Then Justice Barnes narrowed in on one point in the trial \u2013 he highlighted how Mark had effectively utilized cross examination techniques to deal with a witness who was not cooperating.\u00a0 Justice Barnes praised Mark\u2019s natural and effective approach in this transaction. \u201cMark, if you chose to apply yourself you can be successful, I can see that you have the ability to be great.\u201d\u00a0 I witnessed Mark grow at least 5 inches.\u00a0 By the time Justice Barnes was done, he was standing tall and proud with a smile on his face.\u00a0 Mark, a student likely to be written off in his regular classes had been told by a person of authority that he had potential to excel in something very academic and it was clear in his demeanour that the message had positively impacted him greatly.\u00a0 One after one I saw Justice Barnes acknowledge the areas required for improvement but then speak positively about something specific in each candidate\u2019s performance.\u00a0 At the end of the session when each person took their picture with Justice Barnes, everyone stood with pride \u2013 with a big smile on their face.<\/p>\n While one may argue that evaluation has no place in experiential programming, this was clearly a situation where feedback furthered our program goals. It seems that the answer to the question of whether feedback or evaluation is appropriate in experiential justice education is as subjective as the content we tackle in the programming itself.<\/p>\n Mara Clarke<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I\u2019ve been in this justice education game for a while now. I\u2019ve participated in programming for thousands of students, in classrooms, courthouse and communities.\u00a0 While developing this wealth of experience I\u2019ve frequently contemplated the question of whether feedback or evaluation given by justice sector volunteers (\u201cJSVs\u201d -lawyers, judges and justices of the peace) is appropriate […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_eb_attr":"","inline_featured_image":false,"ub_ctt_via":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[47,56,58],"class_list":["post-400","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-from-the-ojen-blog","tag-justice-education","tag-mock-trials","tag-volunteers"],"acf":[],"featured_image_src":null,"author_info":{"display_name":"adnan","author_link":"https:\/\/ojen.ca\/en\/author\/adnan\/"},"yoast_head":"\n