Rikosnormatiivisen osaamisen parantaminen edistämällä opiskelijoiden tietoteoreettisia valmiuksia
Avainsanat:
Rikosoikeus, tietoteoria, yliopistopedagogiikka, rikosoikeuden opetusAbstrakti
Improving normative criminal law knowledge by enhancing students’ epistemological ability
The article deals, firstly, with the epistemological ability of students, i.e., their awareness of the valid normative knowledge concerning criminal law and of the criteria for such normative knowledge. Secondly, the article examines whether the epistemological ability of students correlates with their knowledge of the normative criminal law.
The author examines the validity of the following assumptions: (1) In the basic teaching of criminal law, the case method increases students' knowledge of the criteria for valid normative knowledge concerning criminal law; (2) an increase in epistemological awareness improves the ability of the students to process normative criminal law knowledge; (3) an in-depth ability to process normative criminal law knowledge does not correlate with exam success.
The accuracy of the hypotheses is tested by analysing what sort of conception of knowledge the exam responses reflect and by assessing whether the conception of knowledge reflected in the responses correlates with normative knowledge and exam success. The analysed material consists of exam responses of law students on the basic criminal law course at the Faculty of Law of the University of Turku during the 2017–2018 academic year. The analysis is conducted by means of content analysis.
The author demonstrates that the ability to process normative criminal law knowledge can be improved by enhancing students' epistemological ability. The analysis suggests, however, that the case method utilised in the basic criminal law course contributes to developing an in-depth understanding of the criteria for valid normative criminal law knowledge and a high-level ability to process normative criminal law knowledge for less than 60 % of the students. In addition, the author concludes that the evaluation method used in jurisprudence does not recognise in-depth knowledge. As a result, superficial normative knowledge can lead to as high a grade as normative in-depth knowledge.
