Skip to main content

The Psychology of Competence

In his book Teaching Excellence in Higher Education, Marshall Gregory describes what he calls the “psychology of competence.” In its simplest form, “the psychology of competence” starts with the idea that students have been striving for adult competence from the moment of birth—from learning to feed themselves to learning to drive. As such, by the time they are young adults, they are “competent” in a number of activities and view themselves highly, having reached that level of competency.

Gregory argues that students’ view of themselves as competent leads to two destructive tendencies that have a marked effect on their future learning. First, students have a tendency to view themselves as more competent than they actually are. This, in turn, causes many students to believe they do not need to work hard to become more competent in areas where they perceive that their own competence has been achieved.  Second, they want to hold on to the feelings of competence they’ve worked so hard to gain and so strongly resist any implications or statements from their instructors that they still have more to learn or, even worse, that they are beginning learners.

These tendencies may be even more deeply ingrained in law students, who, having completed their undergraduate educations, may view themselves as competent learners. They may react with shock or even disdain at the idea that they still have a great deal to learn about learning in law school. As Gregory notes:

[Students] are especially not prepared to hear that competence is not the same thing as excellence, or that the size of the gap between everyday competence and excellence is like an ocean that they must learn to navigate over a period of years rather than like a brook they might vault over.[1]

This may be especially true with legal research. Few students make it through their undergraduate education without engaging in some sort of research. As such, they may especially fight against the idea that they are not already competent researchers, despite the fact that the research they’ve previously conducted may bear little resemblance to the complex, analytical reasoning required in legal research. As such, we need to bring these differences into the foreground, never assuming that students recognize how legal research differs from their previous educational experiences, all the while acknowledging students’ earlier efforts to avoid alienating them.


[1] Marshall Gregory, Teaching Excellence in Higher Education 9 (Melissa Valiska Gregory ed., 2013).

Popular posts from this blog

Using Backward Design in Course Development

There are different methods instructors use to design their courses. In his book Creating Significant Learning Experiences, L. Dee Fink identifies three major approaches:
In the first approach, the instructor picks out some number of major topics within their course subject matter, then preps lectures for each topic. Then he or she adds in a final exam and sometimes a midterm, and the course is ready to go.  Fink notes that this approach is less time-consuming, but "pays little or no attention to the quality and quantity of student learning." [1] He explains that this type of learning "has a relatively short half-life and, more significantly, does not meet the educational needs of students and society today." [2]In the second approach, instructors still designs their course around major topics, but rather than focusing solely on lectures, he or she incorporates a variety of active learning opportunities. This approach is more engaging for students, but it still does…

Four Aspects of Effectual Teaching (& Why Instructional Design Is the One Missing In Many Law Courses)

There are four general components of teaching, which all must come together for a teacher to be successful:
Knowledge of the Subject Matter: Most instructors in higher education have this covered. The largest potential hurdle of this aspect of teaching is perhaps remembering to view the material from the perspective of the beginner learner, as opposed to from the teacher's own advanced learner status. In my first year of teaching, I found this to be an issue, as I jumped over steps that were so obvious to me that I didn't even notice them anymore. It was only by students asking questions that illustrated I was missing an important step in their comprehension and by watching the legal writing professor I co-taught with that I began to break down my material into pieces that were more digestible for my students.

Interaction with Students: Instructor-student interaction can take a myriad of forms. As L. Dee Fink writes in Creating Significant Learning Experiences,

"Teacher-stud…

Students Forget Most of What We Teach (And What To Do About That)

Studies show that humans forget most of what they learn. But, students acquire new knowledge better when we keep a couple of things in mind:

1)  Students learn better when they have a clear understanding of why they are being expected to learn new tasks and information. As such, it is critical that we explain to students why we are teaching what we’re teaching. Tying curriculum back to practical application can help students understand the importance of what they are learning. 

For those of us teaching legal research, this is vitally important. We have to tell students why being strong researchers is central to their ability to be efficient lawyers—that they will be spending approximately 35% of their time conducting legal research in their first few years of practice. We have to explain to them that research is an analytical skill that they must practice in context so they can learn to do this critical lawyering skill effectively. It’s also important that we explain the importance of t…

Helping Students Learn to Learn

One aspect of learning that I see students struggle with the most is applying the skills they have learned to new scenarios or situations. It is critical that students are equipped with the ability to continue to advance in their profession and in their knowledge after they have left our courses and law school altogether. This is true for two reasons. First, it's not possible for students to learn everything there is to know about the law--or even one topic within the law--during the course of law school. There's simply too much content to learn; the best we can hope for is to identify the fundamental knowledge for our subject areas and do our best to make sure our students know that material. Second, even if they could learn everything, they would have to be able to continue to learn as new areas of law emerge and preexisting areas of law evolve.

In his book, Creating Significant Learning Experiences, L. Dee Fink identifies three different meanings for "learning how to l…

The “Burden” of Being An Excellent (Legal Research) Teacher

The challenge of being an excellent teacher stems from the necessity of having to be an expert in two areas, one’s subject specialty and the craft of educating. For law librarians who instruct, this means first being an expert in using constantly-evolving legal research databases, not to mention those newly developed resources that we must quickly learn to use, and in the analytical process inherent to legal research. Staying fully abreast of changes to the huge volume of legal materials could alone be a full-time job. When combined with efficiently and effectively serving our patrons, engaging in collection development, and doing any of the other dozens of tasks that librarians undertake on a daily basis, it becomes easy to see why finding the time to hone our craft as teachers would be difficult. Despite these challenges, it's critical that we make time to do so.
As one scholar explains, Really good teachers who want to preserve their skills and get better over time have to go int…