Some lecturers here may claim to use the Socratic Method of teaching but when it comes to crunch few go to the same lengths as American law schools. Law schools in the States commonly use the teaching method to stimulate rational thinking and to illuminate ideas from their students. All jolly exciting. What we are drawing attention to is the embarrasing moment that everyone encounters at some point in their educational and professional career which is not knowing the answer to a direct question. For students confronted by that awkward moment, this is a great bit of advice from someone who has had the pressure of US-style law school questioning from Really? Law? (via The Shark )

Let me reassure all of you aspiring–and even current–law students: the Socratic Method is not that bad . It’s a great way of learning and it’s not as scary as it seems.

If you mess up when the professor calls on you:

1. We don’t really care. We’re too busy focusing on what the professor says.
2. We don’t remember. Unless you keep bringing it up after class.
3. We’re not laughing at you. We all know that next week the professor might be drilling us and we may not have the answer. It’s not funny and we’re not laughing.
4. We don’t think you’re stupid. You just got caught on the one thing you didn’t know. Or you got flustered. Or you misunderstood the question. Or any number of things that don’t involve your intelligence. Law school is hard–for all of us.

I’ve been on both sides–knowing the answers and not knowing–and life goes on.

Now for the professionals. Being stuck in a meeting and receiving a direct question from a client when you don’t know the answer and there is no partner/more knowledgeable assistant/associate on hand to bail you out is more problematic. In this case, not knowing the answer can mean turning around the presumptions in 1, 2, 3 and 4 above. i.e. they do care, they will remember, they will laugh at you (hopefully not in your face but not guaranteed) and they might even enjoy thinking that you are stupid (clients sometimes imagine that lawyers should know all the answers). So deft handling is required and it’s a skill all lawyers should learn. Some options:

1. Furrow brow, nod sincerely, say complex point so you will have to consider in more depth and get back to them on that one. (Not ok if clearly simple)

2. Declare it as a specialist area of law that you will need to refer to a colleague and hope the client doesn’t know more about the subject, your supposed expertise in it and the fact you are bluffing.

3. Move quickly onto the next subject suggesting you were coming to that, hope they forget and provide advice by e-mail once you have looked it up later.

4. Panic, clutch your stomach and run out.

Disclaimer: none of these are foolproof.

The Socratic Method [Really? Law?] (via The Shark )