Neuronal interactions between mentalizing and action systems during indirect request processing

Human communication relies on the ability to process linguistic structure and to map words and utterances onto our environment. Furthermore, as what we communicate is often not directly encoded in our language (e.g., in the case of irony, jokes, or indirect requests), we need to extract additional cues to infer the beliefs and desires of our conversational partners. Although the functional interplay between language and the ability to mentalize has been discussed in theoretical accounts in the past, the neurobiological underpinnings of these dynamics are currently not well understood. Here, we address this issue using functional imaging (fMRI). Participants listened to question-reply dialogues. In these dialogues, a reply is interpreted as a direct reply, an indirect reply, or a request for action, depending on the question. We show that inferring meaning from indirect replies engages parts of the mentalizing network (mPFC) while requests for action also activate the cortical motor system (IPL). Subsequent connectivity analysis using Dynamic Causal Modelling (DCM) revealed that this pattern of activation is best explained by an increase in effective connectivity from the mentalizing network (mPFC) to the action system (IPL). These results are an important step towards a more integrative understanding of the neurobiological basis of indirect speech processing

Teaching property law in the 21st century: what we do now, what should we do in the future?

[Extract] Property law teachers around Australia have a great interest not only in what is currently being covered in property law units in Australian universities but also in how this content is being taught and assessed. Given the central role ascribed to the teaching of property law, as highlighted by Kevin Gray, it is entirely appropriate that property teachers are interested in, and from time to time reflect on, their teaching. However, it is not often that property law teachers, as a collective, have an opportunity to offer their views as to the present and future teaching of property law

Assessment in the law school: contemporary approaches of Australian property law teachers

Assessment in higher education has received increasing attention in the last decade. This attention is partly a result of the recognition that traditional assessments do not reflect the application of learning in a real life, or real work context. Calls for changes to traditional modes of assessment in legal education have gained currency with the latest iteration of what it means to be a law graduate, in terms of knowledge, skills and attitudes. The nature of what is taught in the law curriculum in terms of legal knowledge and skills – both professional and generic – inevitably has an impact on the learning outcomes for a degree course or course unit and this in turn will affect the intent and the mode of assessment. This paper reports on the assessment practices of Australian property law teachers ascertained from results of a national survey, and situates these practices within the context of the diversity of learning outcomes and types of assessment, as well as contemporary thinking on assessment per se

Teaching property law in Australia in the twenty-first century: what we do now, what should we do in the future?

[Extract] The contemporary law degree is changing. Globally, law schools have faced the twin challenges of: the introduction of standards-based quality assurance;2 and the sustained critique of the content-heavy focus of the traditional law degree.3 The profession, academia and the judiciary are calling for graduates who are proficient in a range of professional skills as well as being well versed in the law and its context.4 In terms of property law, new frontiers for the property law teacher to grapple with include the relatively recent creation of new property rights involving land; more sophisticated forms of community title; the increasing importance of environmental considerations; the concept of sustainability in what has otherwise been a market-based field as well as recent significant developments in personal property law.\ud \ud Given the central role ascribed to the teaching of property law, as highlighted in Gray's quote, it is entirely appropriate, and indeed timely, that property teachers take stock and reflect not only on the current and proposed future content of property law units but also on how this content is being taught and assessed. During 2011 the authors invited property law teachers from all Australian law schools to participate in a comprehensive survey regarding the teaching of the compulsory property law unit.5 The survey covered various aspects of teaching property law including content; teaching format; the extent to which skills are taught in property law; learning outcomes; the methods of assessment; the developing areas of property law; and the challenges faced by property law teachers in the twenty-first century. The survey findings provide an in depth insight into the views of Australian property teachers on the current and future teaching of property law

Teaching skills and outcomes in Australian property law units: a survey of current approaches

Globally, higher education and legal education have embraced the development of skills as an integral part of student learning. It is no longer enough that graduates enter the workplace armed only with a body of disembodied discipline knowledge. It is expected that graduates have complementary skills – both generic and professional. These skills do not appear 'magically'; rather it is the role of the law teacher to facilitate students' development of these skills during their studies. The imperative to design curricula that embed skills development has become more urgent with the advent of discipline standards and the new quality regime in Australia. This paper reports on a survey of Australian property law teachers undertaken in late 2011. The paper analyses teaching methods, skills and outcomes in the teaching of property law. In particular, the paper considers how property teachers deal with the development of skills in the property law curriculum, testing Gray's suggestion that '[i]t is in Property Law that consciously or unconsciously the student learns a basic competence in a number of skills which are of immense importance in later life.'(1) If this is true, this paper asks, how and to what extent do Australian property law curricula embrace the teaching of skills

Teaching property law in Australia in the twenty-first century: what we do now, what should we do in the future?

[Extract] The contemporary law degree is changing. Globally, law schools have faced the twin challenges of: the introduction of standards-based quality assurance;2 and the sustained critique of the content-heavy focus of the traditional law degree.3 The profession, academia and the judiciary are calling for graduates who are proficient in a range of professional skills as well as being well versed in the law and its context.4 In terms of property law, new frontiers for the property law teacher to grapple with include the relatively recent creation of new property rights involving land; more sophisticated forms of community title; the increasing importance of environmental considerations; the concept of sustainability in what has otherwise been a market-based field as well as recent significant developments in personal property law. Given the central role ascribed to the teaching of property law, as highlighted in Gray's quote, it is entirely appropriate, and indeed timely, that property teachers take stock and reflect not only on the current and proposed future content of property law units but also on how this content is being taught and assessed. During 2011 the authors invited property law teachers from all Australian law schools to participate in a comprehensive survey regarding the teaching of the compulsory property law unit.5 The survey covered various aspects of teaching property law including content; teaching format; the extent to which skills are taught in property law; learning outcomes; the methods of assessment; the developing areas of property law; and the challenges faced by property law teachers in the twenty-first century. The survey findings provide an in depth insight into the views of Australian property teachers on the current and future teaching of property law