| 1 | Interactional Assessment – Intensity |
| Please select the frequency that you meet/talk/work with academics from other disciplines (i.e. non-legal academics) | Never Rarely Occasionally Frequently
|
| 2 | Interactional Assessment – Contexts |
| In which contexts, if any, have you met/interacted with non-legal academics (you may select all those that apply)? | Research (research groups, workshops, conferences, reading groups, research projects) Private (social friendship) Citizenship (advisory boards, multidisciplinary ethics committees etc.) Teaching (joint supervision, joint teaching) Administrative (e.g. University committee meetings etc.) Other (please state)
|
| 3 | Interactional Assessment – Quantifying |
| Please make a rough assessment of how many non-legal academics you know in a teaching or research context (e.g. joint supervision/teaching, interaction in research groups, reading groups etc.). | |
| 4 | Interactional Assessment – Qualifying your Response |
| If you wish you can expand on the above in the text box below. We are interested in learning more about your interactions with non-legal academics (e.g. are these at Cardiff? Do you collaborate on funded/unfunded projects? How (if at all) does these interactions impact upon your research and teaching? We are also interested in learning about those that collaborate with others outside of academic (e.g. business, external bodies, third sector, government, professional societies, etc.). | |
| 5 | Interactional Assessment – Engagement with Non-Legal Research and Scholarship |
| This question seeks to identify whether you use scholarship from disciplines other than law in your research/teaching. Please select statements that best represent you (you may select all those that apply). | I do not use any non-legal scholarship for my research/teaching I access and read work of non-legal scholars for my research/teaching I collaborate with scholars from other disciplines in the production of research/collaborative teaching I seek advice from non-legal academics in respect of my work Other
|
| 6 | Your Beliefs and Knowledge about Legal Academia as a Discipline |
| How would you describe law as an academic discipline to a non-legal academic interested in what kinds of research, scholarship and enquiries populate the discipline as a whole? (This is a hard question but we’d value any response you can offer). | |
| 7 | Your Beliefs and knowledge about legal academia as a discipline |
| Please indicate, by clicking on the appropriate radio buttons, which of the following pre-attributes you believe best describe law as an academic discipline (you may choose as many as you wish). | Practical, Scientific, Creative, Innovative, Academic, Boring, Fragmented, Modern, Methodological, Vocational, Coherent, Interesting, Unapplied, Unscientific, Reliant on Documents, Empirical, Arcane, Dealing in pure ideas, theoretical, applied, uncreative. |
| 8 | Others’ Beliefs and knowledge about legal academia as a discipline |
| The following list of attributes has been given to non-legal academics in order to ascertain how they typify legal academia. Please indicate, by clicking on the appropriate radio buttons, which attributes you think academics from other disciplines would select when asked to describe law as an academic discipline (you may choose up to five attributes). | Practical, Scientific, Creative, Innovative, Academic, Boring, Fragmented, Modern, Methodological, Vocational, Coherent, Interesting, Unapplied, Unscientific, Reliant on Documents, Empirical, Arcane, Dealing in pure ideas, theoretical, applied, uncreative. |
| 9 | Describing Personality Traits of Legal Academics |
| 13 Personality factors are listed below, each is subdivided into 4 primary personality traits and individual qualities. Please select only 1 primary personality trait per factor that you believe best describes you (You might experience difficulties completing this question, but it has been included for comparative purposes by virtue of an earlier study on academics undertaken in the early 1980s). | Warmth, Reserved, Attentive to Others, Caring, Impersonal; Reasoning, Concrete, Deliberative, Abstract, Quick-thinking; Emotional Stability, Reactive, Co-operative, Assertive, Aggressive; Liveliness, Enthusiastic, Serious, Spontaneous, Careful; Social Boldness, Timid, Thick-Skinned, Socially bold, Threat-sensitive; Vigilance, Suspicious, Trusting, Unsuspecting, Skeptical; Abstractedness, Abstracted, Imaginative, Practical, Down-to-earth; Privateness, Genuine, Discrete, Private, Forthright; Openness to Change, Experimenting, Conservative, Attached to Familiar, Open to Change; Self-Reliance, Individualistic, Group-orientated, Affiliative, Solitary; Perfectionism, Perfectionistic, Tolerates disorder, Organised, Flexible; Rule-Consciousness, Non-conforming, Expedient, Rule Conscious, Dutiful. |
| 10 | Prestige Markers in Legal Academia |
| Please rate the extent to which you think that the following items constitute research prestige markers (for career, promotion) for legal academics. | [Slider bar – between 0 [low prestige] and 100 [high prestige]Peer-reviewed Journal Articles Student Texts Journal articles in practitioner journals Case notes (on legal judgment) Impact on legal practice (e.g. citation in judgments, ideas influencing legal reform) Acquisition of grant funding Monograph Short letters announcing findings Citations
|
| 11 | Nature of and Approach to Legal Research - YOU |
| Please highlight on sliding scale how much you think these subjects and approaches best describe your research and scholarship. | [Slider bar, including ‘not applicable’ box]Collaborative cross-disciplinary work Descriptive, concerned with legal judgments, statutory provisions, and other legal instruments Individual – lone scholarship Investigation of social phenomena Theoretical and critical approaches, including social, economic, feminist, historical and political Normative/Philosophical/Analytical approaches Armchair/library based approach Adopt vocational approach with strong focus on legal education and legal profession Investigative/empirical approaches
|
| 12 | Nature of and Approach to Legal Research – Beliefs of Non-Legal Academics |
| Please highlight on sliding scale how you think academics from other disciplines would be likely to typify legal research. | [Slider bar, including ‘not applicable’ box]Collaborative cross-disciplinary work Descriptive, concerned with legal judgments, statutory provisions, and other legal instruments Individual – lone scholarship Investigation of social phenomena Theoretical and critical approaches, including social, economic, feminist, historical and political Normative/Philosophical/Analytical approaches Armchair/library based approach Adopt vocational approach with strong focus on legal education and legal profession Investigative/empirical approaches
|
| 13 | General Interdisciplinary Attitudes |
| How would you describe your approach to research in interdisciplinary terms? (You may select all those that apply) | I wouldn’t describe myself as very interdisciplinary – I prefer to stick to my own discipline I like to draw upon the work of other disciplines for my research I attend workshops/conferences which are interdisciplinary in nature The research problems I work on are inherently interdisciplinary and require collaboration with scholars from other fields Other
|
