e-ISSN 2231-8542
ISSN 1511-3701

Home / Regular Issue / JTAS Vol. 29 (1) Mar. 2021 / JSSH-5404-2019


Design and Application of a Legal Game to Promote Factual Investigation Knowledge for Undergraduate Law Students

Chainarong Luengvilai, Noppon Wongta and Pitipong Yodmongkol

Pertanika Journal of Tropical Agricultural Science, Volume 29, Issue 1, March 2021


Keywords: Cognitive learning, factual investigation, knowledge management, law of evidence, lawyering skill, legal education, serious game

Published on: 26 March 2021

This study presents a successful example of experimenting with proper step-by-step guidance on how, when and why to conduct factual investigations by introducing new learning tools to a group of law students, such as this set of computer-based games. Deploying the games as an extension of traditional law learning, this paper synthesizes complex tacit knowledge from legal experts, adopting the cognitive learning theory of Bloom’s Taxonomy, to create serious games as new learning approaches. Students’ learning revealed satisfactory achievement in enhancing the body of fact-finding knowledge and engagement. The gaming has potential in advancing practical knowledge of fact investigation for mass utilization, reducing traditional learning obstacles of a Thai law school, while minimizing the gap between existing educational approaches and students’ future professional practices.

  • Act on Judicial Administration of the Courts of Justice B.E. 2543 (A.D. 2000) Section 26-28.

  • Act on Public Prosecution Administration of the Public Prosecution B.E. 2553 (A.D. 2010) Section 49-52.

  • American-Bar-Association. (1992). Report of the task force on law schools and the profession: Narrowing the gap.

  • Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., & Bloom, B. S. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.

  • Andolšek, D. M., & Andolšek, S. (2015). Knowledge sharing in an organization from the perspective of the individual. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 3(2), 65-76.

  • Andrews, D., & Baber, C. (2009). The use of narrative in the design of serious games for criminal investigation and community policing. In Q. Mehdi, A. Elmaghraby, D. Anderson & E. Ch’ng (Eds.), Proceedings of CGAMES’2009 USA (pp. 63-67). The University of Wolverhampton.

  • Argyris, C. (1976). Single-loop and double-loop models in research on decision making. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(3) 363-375.

  • Ashforth, B. E., & Lee, R. T. (1990). Defensive behavior in organizations: A preliminary model. Human Relations, 43(7), 621-648.

  • Atkinson, R., & Flint, J. (2001). Accessing hidden and hard-to-reach populations: Snowball research strategies. Social Research Update, 33(1), 1-4.

  • Becker, D. M. (2001). Some concerns about the future of legal education. Journal of Legal Education, 51, 469-486.

  • Biljana, N.-C., & Dragana, S. (2017). Educational needs of teacher for introduction and application of innovative models in educational work to improve teaching International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 5(1), 49-56.

  • Binder, D. A., & Bergman, P. B. (2003). Taking lawyering skills training seriously. Clinical Law Review, 10(19), 191-220.

  • Binder, D. A., Moore, A. J., & Bergman, P. (2007). A depositions course: Tackling the challenge of teaching for professional skills transfer. Clinical Law Review, 13, 871-898.

  • Birzer, M. L. (2003). The theory of andragogy applied to police training. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 26(1), 29-42.

  • Bock, H., Boyd, C., Gibson, S., Lyons, P., Mottershead, T., Rose, L. M., Rushton, T., Stacy, C. U., Vaaler, B., & Westfahl, S. (2009). The future of legal education: A skills continuum.

  • Boon, A., & Webb, J. (2008). Legal education and training in England and Wales: Back to the future? Journal of Legal Education, 58(1), 79-121.

  • Brest, P. (1995). The responsibility of law schools: Educating lawyers as counselors and problem solvers. Law and Contemporary Problems, 58, 5-17.

  • Breuer, J. S., & Bente, G. (2010). Why so serious? On the relation of serious games and learning. Eludamos. Journal for Computer Game Culture, 4(1), 8, 10-11.

  • Browne, K. (2005). Snowball sampling: Using social networks to research non-heterosexual women. Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 47-60.

  • Cannon, H. M., & Feinstein, A. H. (2014). Bloom beyond bloom: Using the revised taxonomy to develop experiential learning strategies. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 32, 349-355.

  • Cantroll, A. M. (1952). Law school and the layman: Is legal education doing its job. American Bar Association Journal, 38, 907.

  • Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2013). Research methods in education. Routledge.

  • Day, J. A., Foley, J. D., Groeneweg, R., & Van der Mast, C. A. (2004). Enhancing the classroom learning experience with Web lectures.

  • Forehand, M. (2010). Bloom’s taxonomy. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology (pp. 41-47). Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

  • Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The story of success. Little, Brown and Company.

  • Halawi, L. A., McCarthy, R. V., & Pires, S. (2009). An evaluation of e-learning on the basis of Bloom’s taxonomy: An exploratory study. Journal of Education for Business, 84(6), 374-380.

  • Halm, D. S. (2015). The impact of engagement on student learning. International Journal of Education and Social Science, 2(2), 22-33.

  • Irish, C. R. (2006). Reflections of an observer: The international conference on legal education reform. Wisconsin International Law Journal, 24(1), 5-22.

  • Kastberg, S. (2003). Using Bloom’s Taxonomy as a framework for classroom assessment. Mathematics Teacher, 96(6), 402-405.

  • Kim, B., Park, H., & Baek, Y. (2009). Not just fun, but serious strategies: Using meta-cognitive strategies in game-based learning. Computers & Education, 52(4), 800-810.

  • Knowles, M. S. (1970). The modern practice of adult education (Vol. 41). Association Press New York.

  • Knowles, M. S. (1978). Andragogy: Adult learning theory in perspective. Community College Review, 5(3), 9-20.

  • Luengvilai, C., & Yodmongkol, P. (2011, November). What fundamental lawyering skills do law students of Chiang Mai University need to improve their legal practice ability? Paper presented at The 11th Annual SEAAIR Conference: University Social Responsibility: Pathways to Excellence, Chiang Mai, Thailand.

  • Luengvilai, C., & Yodmongkol, P. (2012, September). Interviewing questions design for knowledge capture: Lawyer’s factual investigation skill. Paper presented at The 6th International Conference on Software, Knowledge. Information Management and Application (SKIMA), Chengdu, China.

  • Luengvilai, C., & Yodmongkol, P. (2016). Mediation game when the conflict can be fun to learn—A legal skill learning tool: The integration of knowledge management, learning theory and serious game concept. International Education Studies, 9(5), 219.

  • Maxeiner, J. R., & Yamanaka, K. (2004). The new Japanese law schools: Putting the professional into legal education. Pacific Rim Law & Policy Journal Association, 13, 303.

  • McClain, Jr. J. A. (1953). Is legal education do its job? A reply. American Bar Association Journal, 39(2), 120-175.

  • Merriam, S. B. (2001). Andragogy and self-directed learning: Pillars of adult learning theory. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2001(89), 3-14.

  • Michael, D. R., & Chen, S. L. (2005). Serious games: Games that educate, train, and inform. Thomson Course Technology PTR.

  • Office of the Attorney General of Thailand. (1996). คดีเชอรี่แอน - กระบวนการยุติธรรมจะคุ้มครองสิทธิเสรีภาพของ ผู้บริสุทธิ์ได้อย่างไร? : รายงานการเสวนาทางวิชาการ [Report of the seminar on The Sherry Ann Duncan Case: How to the criminal justice could protect the rights and freedom of the Innocent?]. Office of the Attorney General of Thailand.

  • Park, C. (2003). Engaging students in the learning process: The learning journal. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 27(2), 183-199.

  • Pohjonen, S., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2002). Challenges for teaching interaction skills for law students. The Law Teacher, 36(3), 294-306.

  • Post, D. (2009, October 31). Cracks appearing in law firms associate model. The Volokh Conspiracy.

  • Public Law Net. (2017). การปฏิรูปด้านการเรียนการสอนและการศึกษากฎหมาย ตอนที่ 1 และ 2 [Legal studying-teaching and education reform Part 1 and 2].

  • Sadler, G. R., Lee, H.-C., Lim, R. S.-H., & Fullerton, J. (2010). Recruiting hard-to-reach United States population sub-groups via adaptations of snowball sampling strategy. Nursing & Health Sciences, 12(3), 369-374.

  • Sathitsuksomboon, C. (2015, March 3). Thailand’s legal system: Requirements, practice, and ethical conduct. Thailand Law Forum: Law analysis and features on Southeast Asia.

  • Sattayutchamnan. (2019). วิชาข้อเท็จจริง [Factual theory] (4th ed.). Prayoonwong. (Original work published 1939).

  • Sherry Ann Duncan 1999 No. 2071/2542.

  • Susi, T., Johannesson, M., & Backlund, P. (2007). Serious games: An overview (Technical Report HS-IKI-TR-07-001).

  • Takeuchi, H., & Nonaka, I. (2000). Classic work: Theory of organizational knowledge creation. In D. Morey, M. T. Maybury, B.Thuraisingham (Eds.), Knowledge management: Classic and contemporary works.

  • Thai Bar Under The Royal Patronage. (1964). Regulation of Thai bar students, studying, and discipline of 1964.

  • ศาลสั่งจ่าย 26 ล.แพะเชอรี่แอน [Thai Supreme Court ordered a compensation to Sherry Ann Duncan case for 26 million Thai Bath] (2003). Mathichon Weekly. pp. 1-12.

  • Thailand Development Research Institute. (2015), ปฏิรูป (หลักสูตร) นักกฎหมายไทยรับความท้าทายอนาคต [Law curriculum reform to prepare the future challenging].

  • Thailand Lawyers Act B.E. 2528 (A.D. 1985) s. 35.

  • Thailand Ministry of Justice. (2015). Rights and liberties protection monthly report.

  • Tipmanee, P. (2011). Analysis and evaluation of the undergraduate programs at Pridi Banomyong Faculty of Law, Dhurakij Pundit University. Dhurakij Pundit University.

  • Trowler, P., & Trowler, V. (2010). Student engagement evidence summary.

  • Waincymer, J. (2010). Internationalization of legal education; putting the ‘why’ before the ‘how’. In S. Steele & K.Taylor (Eds.), Legal Education in Asia: Globalization, change and contexts (pp. 68-88). Routledge.

  • Wang, T.-S. (2009). The development of legal education in Taiwan: An analysis of the history of law and society. In S. Steele & K. Taylor (Eds.), Legal Education in Asia: globalization, change and contexts (pp. 136-155). Routledge Law in Asia.

  • Wilson, M. J. (2010). US legal education methods and ideals: Application to the Japanese and Korean systems. Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law, 18, 295-335.

  • Yusoff, A., Crowder, R., Gilbert, L., & Wills, G. (2009, July). A conceptual framework for serious games. In ICALT ‘09: Proceedings of the 2009 Ninth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (pp. 21-23).

ISSN 1511-3701

e-ISSN 2231-8542

Article ID


Download Full Article PDF

Share this article

Recent Articles