Critical Writing Skills in Legal Education

B.M.J. van Klink, Lyana Francot

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review


In legal education, criticism is conceived as an academic activity. As lecturers, we expect from students more than just the expression of their opinion; they have to evaluate and criticize a certain practice, building on a sound argumentation and provide suggestions on how to improve this practice. Criticism not only entails a negative judgment but is also constructive since it aims at changing the current state of affairs that it rejects (for some reason or other). In this article, we want to show how we train critical writing in the legal skills course for first-year law students (Juridische vaardigheden) at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. We start with a general characterization of the skill of critical writing on the basis of four questions: 1. Why should we train critical writing? 2. What does criticism mean in a legal context? 3. How to carry out legal criticism? and 4. How to derive recommendations from the criticism raised? Subsequently, we discuss, as an illustration to the last two questions, the Dutch Urgenda case, which gave rise to a lively debate in the Netherlands on the role of the judge. Finally, we show how we have applied our general understanding of critical writing to our legal skills course. We describe the didactic approach followed and our experiences with it.
Original languageEnglish
Article number1
Pages (from-to)1-15
Number of pages15
JournalLaw and Method
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2019

Bibliographical note

Special Issue on Active Learning and Teaching in Legal Education


  • legal education
  • critique
  • writing skills
  • critical writing skills
  • rule of law


Dive into the research topics of 'Critical Writing Skills in Legal Education'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this