Le Brun, MJ; Ryan,T; Weyand, P; Scull, L --- "Producing Multi-Media Teaching/Learning Materials for Teaching Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility in Australian Law Schools: And the Lesson is . . . Soldier On" [2001] LegEdRev 9; (2001) 12(1&2) Legal Education Review 157

Producing Multi-Media Teaching/Learning Materials for Teaching Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility in Australian Law Schools: And the Lesson is . . . Soldier On

M J LE BRUN WITH T RYAN, P WEYAND, & L SCULL *

INTRODUCTION

Implementation of a new medium or method cannot be expected to work perfectly but probably provides some benefits along with its disadvantages. We need to learn the lessons of each implementation, and then use those lessons learned. In this way we slowly build a body of knowledge of how best to use educational media, and a teaching profession that knows what it is doing and why.1 (emphasis added)
The aim of this article is to encourage law teachers to produce interactive teaching/learning materials in law and to share the lessons that they learn from their work to enrich what we know about the development of, and student learning with, multimedia teaching/learning products.2 In this article I describe the process of the creation of an interactive CD-ROM designed to teach law students and trainee legal practitioners3 legal ethics and professional responsibility (“LE/PR”). I outline some of the problems that were faced and the lessons that were learned so that other law teachers and multi-media developers might profit from them and more confidently embark on producing interactive teaching/ learning materials that enrich learning in law. In so doing, I hope to be able to contribute to the development of a scholarship of teaching as advocated by Boyer and other educationalists and translate what Laurillard suggests about teaching and learning with multi-media into practice.

BACKGROUND

The production of interactive teaching/learning materials in legal ethics and professional responsibility was made possible with the award of a National Teaching Fellowship and a Committee for University Teaching and Staff Development (“CUTSD”) grant in late 1998. The Fellowship project was designed to improve the teaching of legal ethics and professional responsibility in Australian law schools through a sharing of ideas by leaders in legal ethics teaching in the United States and Australia. The CUTSD grant built on what was learned under the Fellowship. The main aim of the CUTSD grant was to produce multi-media teaching and learning materials in Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility. The CUTSD grant was given to for the production of two videos and accompanying hardcopy teaching materials for law students and trainee legal practitioners.

THE TWO VIDEOS AND THE ACCOMPANYING TEXT

Two thirty-minute videos were produced. The first, “A Family Affair,” centres around a custody dispute. It is based on research conducted by Debra Lamb.4 The second, “Securing the Tender,” deals with preparations for the submission of tenders for an information technology project.5 It was based on information given by lawyers in practice. Both videos were designed on the basis of this research to raise genuine (and realistic) issues of legal ethics and professional responsibility that vary from the commonplace (witnessing an already signed document) to the complex (managing and maintaining law firm security systems).

A CD-ROM?

The completion of the video-hardcopy package changed direction abruptly when Blake Dawson Waldron (“BDW”) Lawyers offered to provide financial support to convert the video-hardcopy material into an interactive CD-ROM format.6 As some members of my project team7 had learned about the process of making videos under the auspices of an earlier CUTSD funded project,8 I was only slightly concerned about the video making process. With the BDW funding, my confidence diminished. I had no idea of what was involved in making a CD-ROM.
The final CD-ROM that we produced, “Ethics, Conscience, and Professionalism: Rediscovering the Heart of Law,” was completed approximately 1¼ years after the scripts for the videos were written and over two years after the Fellowship and the grant were awarded. Launchpad Multimedia, located in Brisbane, Queensland, was employed to transform the video-hardcopy materials to CD-ROM format.

Information about Launchpad Multimedia

Launchpad Multimedia is one of Australia’s oldest established multimedia companies.9 Launchpad specialises in the development of interactive educational multimedia for schools, government, industry, and the tertiary education sectors. They have demonstrable expertise in developing remote and flexible online learning systems that closely integrate CD-ROMs with web delivery. In addition to the ethics CD-ROM that they completed for me, Launchpad has completed a number of flexible training projects.10

PRODUCING THE CD-ROM

Surprisingly, I found that the challenge of making the CD-ROM proved to be quite minor by comparison with what happened during the making of the videos.11 The CD-ROM process proceeded smoothly – at least after I understood what was involved, which did take a while. The amount of time spent in the production of the CD-ROM did, however, exceed that of researching for and writing the video scripts and completing the videos and accompanying text, possibly because the CD-ROM process commenced in earnest while I was working in Hong Kong, and the remainder of the CD production team was working in Queensland.
One major decision that I had to make very early in the production of the CD-ROM concerned the format that the teaching/learning package would take (ie Should the video be in MPEG 1 or MPEG 4 format?) This decision was not easy because I did not fully understand the options available to me initially. Members of my project team and I had to meet with Launchpad staff on more than one occasion to discuss various options.12 I also invited Dr Wayne Ransley13 to join us for one meeting so that he could give me some additional “layperson” advice on what format we might adopt and how we might proceed. Before a final decision was made, information about the platforms used in Australian law schools had to be gathered so that whatever format was produced could be used by the majority of schools. Decisions as to whether to “play safe” in terms of video and audio quality or aim for the cutting edge in terms of technological capabilities had to be made. Since the project was likely to take approximately one year to complete and new technologies were being developed all the time, I decided to experiment. Launchpad agreed – and seemed keen – to push the technology boundaries.
Although I was clear about the contents of the package, I had considerable difficulty translating what I really saw as a “book” into an interactive multi-layered format. I had used very few (virtually no) CD-ROM packages before embarking on the project, so I had no real idea of what a successful educational CD-ROM looked like; nor did I know what could be achieved. Launchpad and my student project team members did, however, have some of the expertise that I lacked, although we sometimes disagreed on what was attractive and useful. For example, when deciding on layout for the CD I discovered how averse I was to all the “stuff” on the average CD-ROM. The student project team found that “stuff” interesting and exciting. This discovery proved to be important because the CD-ROM had to be designed to cater for the needs of all users, despite varying computer literacy skills and different styles of, and approaches to, learning.
Differences of opinion amongst the team were not uncommon, and I welcomed them for the most part. Occasionally I had to exercise a casting vote. Initially I wanted the “look” of the package clean and sharp – white background with clear lines defined by the strong and sharp colours of black, oxblood, and jacaranda. When Launchpad produced the prototype layout to my specifications, I knew my ideas were mistaken. The design, though expertly done, was cold, sterile, uninviting – more like an academic law text than an invitation to learn legal ethics interactively.
Fortunately, Launchpad was happy to redesign. We talked about the sorts of colours that the project team liked (blues, greens, yellow, lavender) and the way lines and spaces might be used. Some time later, Renee James produced another prototype. The colours were subtle, the lines fluid, and the texture warm. James also produced the same prototype using yellow and maroon instead of blue, green, yellow, and lavender. All of the women consulted about the look of the CD-ROM preferred the green, blue, yellow, lavender combination; however, the two males consulted preferred the red/yellow version. Given that law has been male dominated in so many ways for so long, and given the number of women in law schools in Australia, the project team opted for the more (possibly) “feminine” look. This choice heralded the end of stage one, with an agreement on a basic format. It was time to move to the nitty-gritty detail.
As noted above, I was fairly certain of the content of the educational package. I also had a fairly clear idea of what users of the programme should be able to do and how they might move between sections and navigate through the programme. In addition to information on the technical use aspects of the CD-ROM (eg “Quit” and “Help” buttons), I wanted the package to include:

• Two videos that could be played and accessed as a central part of the teaching/learning package. This involved thinking about how a “no entry” block could be placed in the programme to prevent users from accessing some of the questions before they had watched the relevant video.
• Background information about the teaching/learning package, its production, its use, and its educational purpose.14
• Information to help the users of the package navigate through the materials, including a site map (or mud-map) for the package.
• Questions of different types (true/false; multiple choice; open-ended) and of various levels of difficulty that raise issues in legal ethics and professional responsibility. (This section and the two videos form the central part of the package.)
• Additional questions which users could answer that addressed current issues of legal ethics and professional responsibility. This included sections on comparing the videos, multi-disciplinary practice, and how lawyers can minimise risk, and questions about human motivation.
• A set of alternative dialogues so that users could listen to different ways in which lawyers might address some of the ethical issues raised in the video “A Family Affair.” This section gives users the opportunity to explore the appropriateness of each response and an opportunity to fashion their own repertoire of responses. It also gives users a chance to appreciate the differences between learning by seeing and listening, and learning just by listening.15
• A section introducing users to some key issues in Philosophy and Applied Ethics so that they are able to reap the benefits of inter-disciplinary insight.16
• A section that encourages users to reflect on their own conduct and ideas about ethical behaviour and explore the sorts of temptations that might be sufficient for them to “cross the line” and engage in unethical or ethically questionable behaviour. Users are asked to think about themselves in relation to what they are learning to give them a sense of the importance of knowing themselves and their strengths and weaknesses, and to encourage users to reflect on and question their own motivations.
• A video component in which students could learn about the various characters in the video – what makes them tick, what might cause them to stray beyond the “straight and narrow,” and why.
• An expandable glossary in which definitions of key words used in the CD-ROM were written and to which users could add additional terms, thus “customising” the package.
• Some light relief – a section that reinforces what has been learned in a more relaxed setting. “Questions for the Insomniac” raises some of the most difficult questions included in the CD-ROM. “Find a Word,” “Jeopardy,” and the crossword puzzle section reinforce some of the vocabulary used in the package.17 The section “Bloopers” encourages users to increase their powers of observation as they identify some of the mistakes that were made in the videos and the CD-ROM package.
• A section for references and further resources, which includes information about text-based resources and web-based sites.18

LAYOUT

Even though I had clear ideas of what I wanted (and did not want), I had concerns about whether they could be converted into reality – or, for that matter, whether I could communicate my, at times nebulous, ideas clearly to Launchpad and to the other members of the project team. Often our “wires” crossed as we did not share the same conceptual “language.” This required considerable guidance (and great patience) from Launchpad staff. The project team’s ideas about layout developed as the project took shape. These ideas included:

• creating a site map of the CD-ROM. Once this skeleton was completed by Launchpad, the relationships between the various sections began to make sense to me.
• making the package as lively and as interactive as possible.
• being able to move within the videos to questions about the various characters, their roles, their backgrounds, and their motivations to give users some idea of how individuals might be tempted to engage in unethical conduct.
• placing certain icons on the screen at appropriate times. For example, I had some idea of where the buttons for “Can Philosophy Help?” and “Resources and References” might appear on the screen, even though I could not easily explain how this could be achieved.
• using one or two illustrations (cartoon characters and other types of pictures were considered) throughout the video for some additional light relief. Some of members of the project team were eager to have a little angel and devil float in and out of the programme to indicate progress; others were less than enthusiastic.19 I was keen.

QUESTION AND ANSWERS: “WHAT IF ...?” AND “HOW ARE WE GOING?”

When writing the questions that drew on the two videos, I decided to rely on the easily available Australian texts on LE/PR written by Dal Pont, Ross, and Ross and MacFarlane20 on the assumption that users of the CD-ROM might consult these texts as they worked through the educational package, or that users are already familiar with these texts.21 These books themselves helped me structure the categories of questions that I wrote and helped me develop links to (and separations between) topics that spanned various conceptual categories. Nevertheless, one difficulty that I did face was trying to link certain related sections (eg “Duty to the Client” and “Duty to the Court”). Since the topics in LE/PR are not conceptually discrete, I had to make judgment calls about which topics fell under which headings. In the end “Confidentiality,” “Conflicts of Interest,” “Duty to the Client,” and “Duty to the Court” were grouped as central topics and included under the heading “Unethical Culture.”

ASSESSMENT

Launchpad made several significant and welcome contributions to my overall plan, particularly in the area of assessment. They had ideas about a design for a pre-test that could be used to determine the level of the user’s understanding before the user commenced working through the educational package.
Launchpad also created a tool that gave users the option to choose the level of difficulty of questions that they answered in the package. This gave users the opportunity to use the package for summative and formative assessment purposes.
In addition, Launchpad had perfected a system of assessment and evaluation so that users can receive visual feedback on their performance.
Finally, Launchpad created a platform so that students can print the questions, their answers, and the sample answers provided in the package by accessing the information in the “Personal Profile” section of the CD-ROM. Thus students are able to use the package for a thorough review of what they have learned.

USING THE PACKAGE

Some of the issues on assessment were not so straightforward, however. They needed further thought, and I soon realised that the decisions that I took on assessment had implications for how the educational package could best be used. To illustrate: originally, I wanted to design a complete stand-alone teaching/learning package that would give users ultimate flexibility and would give them immediate feedback on their work.22 I thought this to be very important because not all law schools in Australia were teaching LE/PR at the time I applied for the grant for this project. However, I could not decide how this could be achieved if I also included open-ended questions in the text. In many cases it was not possible to give sample answers of what might be appropriate or inappropriate responses. This is not surprising, given that many times there is no clear answer to legal ethics problems. In addition, sometimes the answer was jurisdiction-specific. Given my desire to include these types of questions (as indicative of the difficulty inherent in resolving ethical problems) and the problem that I faced giving high quality, timely feedback, I was forced to choose: either delete the open-ended questions or admit that input from a teacher/facilitator would be necessary so that users could get the most educational benefit from the package. As a result of the inclusion of open-ended questions, I could not simply adopt any of the feedback processes that had been adopted in other self-education packages. And I had to acknowledge the need for the package to accompany tuition.
This makes sense now; it is consistent with what decision-making in the arena of ethics is about. Since ethics is, in essence, a communal activity, and since the identification, description, and resolution of issues of legal ethics and professional responsibility are, indeed, best undertaken in discussion with others, there are limitations if the package is promoted for use primarily by individuals working alone.

MAINTAINING MOMENTUM: KEEPING THE CD-ROM LIVELY AND THE PROJECT ALIVE

Once the prototype was complete, the difficult, time- consuming, and at time exceptionally tedious work of proofreading and checking began and, with it, decisions had to be made about additional workload. Although I was very pleased with what was being produced, I found some of the text-based material (in particular the question and answer sections and parts of the inter-disciplinary section) lifeless because they were so text-based. I thought that we needed to generate more ideas about delivery. Launchpad, again generously, agreed. Here the work of the graphic artist, in particular, became central.
Not surprisingly, the work that Launchpad assumed for this project vastly exceeded the number of hours that were estimated. Launchpad had originally provided a quote on an extension of my original interactive CD-ROM “book.” However, as I became aware of the capabilities of the platform, I became increasingly interested and increasingly demanding of the technology and resources that Launchpad could provide. All of us knew that there were no additional funds available for this project. Launchpad (so I’ve been told) also knew that what I was attempting was innovative and cutting edge in both the subject matter and its treatment, so they were happy to see the project to a satisfactory completion. Launchpad was committed to achieving an optimal outcome, so they were willing to spend many hours on its completion.23
There were two main problems that Launchpad faced. First, Launchpad was not brought in at the inception of the project because at that time I had only funding for the production of the video/manual package. The video had already been scripted and shot. Launchpad, therefore, had to adapt it to the technology and to my particular needs. Secondly, whilst I had an idea in my mind of what I wanted, Launchpad knew that the product would be different once they changed my mind-set on developing interactive multi-media. In short, I had difficulty defining my final conception of the project at the time that I commenced the CD-ROM part of the project. Launchpad had to teach me about the capabilities of the technologies and then live with the consequences as I adapted and applied the technologies to my specific needs and wishes.

CLIENT UNFAMILIARITY AND LAUNCHPAD’S CONTRIBUTIONS

Launchpad reports that client unfamiliarity with the medium is an issue frequently encountered by them. Clients often have exceptional ideas for a CD-ROM product – these range from ideas about solid written content through to including the organisational and financial resources needed to produce such a product. However, the translation between written and on-screen content is a large conceptual leap. Content will need some work before it is suitable for CD-ROM delivery because of the differences between, say, a book and a CD-ROM – generally the initial version of content is written in “book” style as was the case in my project. The differences between “book style” and CD-ROM delivery generally include less text per “page,” and a more three-dimensional approach to content (ie there are more links between related pieces of content, and the content itself can be interspersed with questions and activities to enhance learning). I found that, in some senses, learning about this unique structure and the options it makes possible is itself a process that must happen as the project is being developed. However, from a programming perspective, it is optimal to have all the content finalised before the project begins. In their work Launchpad tries to strike a balance between these two competing needs by providing clients with as much help as possible before the content is finalised and also by providing prototypes as the work progresses so changes can be made as early as possible.

REVIEWING THE (ALMOST) FINISHED PRODUCT

One recurring problem was deciding on the most appropriate video format to use as the project progressed. In the end, Launchpad decided to produce two versions of the CD-ROM, an MPEG 1 and an MPEG 4 version. The MPEG 1 version is for use on lower end machines to ensure that the video plays smoothly, although the visual loses some quality in this process. This is the version that has been pressed, as it is the most versatile for use on a variety of machines in different settings. The MPEG 4 version is for use on higher-end machines only, as it increases the size of the video in order to display it more clearly while still providing for smooth playing. However, apart from the video, both versions are identical.
Another problem was finding equipment sufficiently powerful for my project team to review the educational package as it developed. This was largely because the programme was specifically targeted at the upper end of the computer market at the time it was produced.

LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE PROJECT24

We – I, my law school team, and the team at Launchpad – learned a number of lessons from this project that might be of use to developers of multi-media teaching and learning packages. Some of these lessons included strategies for survival; some were quite unexpected; some of them were downright painful.

PLAN AND PREPARE

• If possible, exhaust all sources of funding before you start production. Secure all your funding then decide on the format for your package. Decide what you want to do at the outset – what form the multi-media package will take – and then stick to it. We could have saved time, energy, and money had we known when designing the videos and accompanying text that they would form the basis of a CD-ROM.
• If you are a luddite, as some of the video production team were (and possibly still are), express your computer ignorance at the outset to your production team. It is better to admit that you do not know what you are talking about than have it revealed by the blank look on your face when the debate about the appropriate MPEG format arises.
• Become well familiar with the language used in the information technology industry. Read about the process of multi-media production before you commence your work.25
• Try to imagine how the product will look and be used once it is in concrete form. In effect, you need to picture the project from the end product you wish to achieve and then work backwards. Visualise it as a three-dimensional text so that linkages and connections can be made between sections on the same “layer” and between the “layers.” In the new world of multi-media, anything is (almost) possible. In some ways, you are only limited by your imagination. Think outside the square – difficult though that is for us lawyers.
• Avoid reworking content. Make sure that the content is proofed, edited, and corrected before supplying it to the production team. In our situation, the final major technical issue was the provision of complete and final materials. When materials are supplied to a developer, they should be final edits. In this project, considerable time was spent reworking materials previously supplied.
• Test the product on a sample of people who are likely to use the product.
• Do not let your personality shape the product. You need to consider the product from the position of the users.
• Decide early on shared conventions for the CD-ROM to save time (eg spelling of certain words (English or American); use of punctuation).

Strategies for Survival

• Plan. Persevere. Be patient. Think positively. Managing a group of individuals with different skills, abilities, and time constraints can prove demanding and exhausting – but rewarding.
• Work with a small team on whom you can rely and in whose judgment you can repose trust. Make sure that your team includes users (eg students) who can guide you and give you feedback on the project and the product as it develops. Include colleagues who are generous with their time and with their ideas. At the same time, make sure that those who contribute to various parts of the educational package do not try to take control of the direction of the project.
• Expect delays and budget for delays. Even though I was forewarned by Launchpad about the effort that would be involved, I found the actual time that I spent proof- reading and identifying “bugs” extraordinary; the task required a great deal of good will on all sides.26
• Be aware of how any sort of delay (even a small delay) can affect morale. You need to keep the enthusiasm fresh and the momentum going, otherwise the project may not reach completion. This one almost didn’t.
• When you are creating a multi-media package, ensure that your project team members and the ultimate users have the technology to run the product. Creating a package that people are not going to be able to use is frustrating for the creator and the end user.
• Be prepared to accept 90% as a benchmark of capability or completeness. You can always find a way to improve or extend a multimedia project. The remaining 10% will take at least as long as the first 90% to complete.

AND AS FOR THE NEXT PROJECT . . .?

The market is wide-open for the creation of new flexible teaching/learning materials in law – even though anecdotal evidence suggests that the production of interactive teaching and learning materials is often very difficult: budgets are unrealistic; timelines are not met; exhaustion (and sometimes depression) takes over. Despite obstacles such as these, I and my team believe that the effort is worthwhile.
When asked what was learned from this project, one (exhausted) project team member wrote:

After you complete the first successful project, your options become simple: take on another project; make a decision not to attempt a similar project; make a decision not to attempt a similar project and stick to that decision. But don’t make that decision too hastily.27
If it were not for the determination and sheer grit of three team members in particular,28 I would have stopped work on this project on at least three separate occasions (a response which appears to be quite common in projects of this nature). In retrospect, I am pleased that I did not because we have created a rather novel teaching/learning resource in law, and we have learned many lessons in the process that will stand us in good stead for the next.

WHAT ELSE HAVE WE LEARNED?29

• View each product as the next in a stream of products. Each time you work on a multi-media project you acquire new skills and perceptions as the technology is constantly changing.
• Be pro-active. Explore what you want to do with your technical team and hope that you can work together to achieve your educational vision.
• Remember: innovation is time consuming and expensive. As Launchpad explained to me, the model for online and flexible learning packages is continually evolving. Each time a project is produced, we contribute research and development for the production of more complete and effective learning models.
• Learn from experience. As Launchpad told me, instructional design for multi-media is inherently different from other forms of instructional design. Nevertheless, when an educationalist has completed her or his first project, s/he can complete the next project in half the time or less, even though it will have greater complexity than the first.
• Take risks on developing new formats and applications. Push the technical boundaries. Experiment.30

Right now – now that I have recovered from the legal ethics CD-ROM project – I am about to embark on another multi-media flexible learning project in law; this time an expandable web-based teaching/learning platform for teaching law students at the City University of Hong Kong how to conduct an initial client interview. I understand “mistakes” can be erased on a web platform but not on a CD-ROM. Too bad I hadn’t known that before . . .

* MJ Le Brun is a Visiting Associate Professor of Law, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, and the recipient of a National Teaching Fellowship awarded to improve the quality of teaching of Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility.
Trinity Ryan is an instructional designer with Launchpad Multimedia.
Peter Weyand is the Director of Launchpad.
Lawry Scull is a former Law and Accounting student. She now works as an associate with a Brisbane law firm. Scull contributed significantly to the production of the videos that form the centre of the CD-ROM.
©2001. (2001) 12 Legal Educ Rev 157.
 I wish to extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to the individuals named above as well as to those who have worked to see the project to completion. Special thanks and appreciation are given to Gayle Gasteen and Carmel Leonard for their foresight and fortitude, and to Francis Sellies and Renee James of Launchpad Multimedia for their creative input.
 A version of this article was presented with a demonstration of the legal ethics CD-ROM prototype at the “Legal Ethics and Adversarialism Workshop” held in Perth, Western Australia, November 2000 and at the “Teaching Ethics Conference” held in Brisbane, Queensland in April 2001.

1 D Laurillard, Rethinking University Teaching: A Framework for the Use of Educational Technology (London: Routledge, 1993) 8.

2 A number of benefits flow from well-designed pre-programmed computer-based learning. These include: attractive presentation of information; inclusion of embedded questions and varying levels of difficulty of questions; use of simulation and modeling; possibilities for individualised and group study; increase in learner choice; use of mastery learning; use of personalised/group testing and diagnosis; increase in motivation; and the ability to be adapted to individual user’s learning styles and approaches to learning. AW (Tony) Bates, Technology, Open Learning, and Distance Education (London: Routledge, 1995), 191-192.

3 I adopt the word “user” because the educational package has been designed for students and practitioners alike.

4 Laurillard, supra note 1, at 217.

5 After the range of the ethical issues that were to be addressed in each video was identified and a clearer idea of the sorts of storylines that could be generated emerged, the characters and the scripts began to develop with the assistance of law students and colleagues at Griffith University.

6 Gayle Gasteen initiated the project with Blake Dawson Waldron.

7 The core of the video-project team was Le Brun and Scull, who were later joined by law student William Powell. The benefits of inviting students and colleagues to work as project team members is catalogued in M Le Brun, Enhancing Student Learning of Law by Involving Students (and Colleagues) in Developing Multi-Media Teaching and Learning Materials (2000) 34 Law Teacher 40.

8 This resulted in the production of a video-manual teaching/learning package entitled “A New Face of Lawyering: A Client-Centred Approach to the Initial Lawyer-Client Interview.”

9 Launchpad was established in 1993.

10 The flexible training projects developed by Launchpad include: RAFS CD-ROM for DEETYA (Australia’s first certificate level course on CD-ROM); NSW TAFE Aboriginal Coordinators CD-ROM for Aboriginal Educators; University of New England, Case Management CD-ROM for Nurses; Link Resources Material Requirement Planning CD-ROM; TAFE NSW Animal Studies Online CD-ROM Hybrid for Vet Nurses; TAFE NSW Tertiary Preparation Certificate Online CD-ROM Hybrid; TAFE NSW Manufacturing Online CD-ROM Hybrid for the Plastics Industry; QLD Main Roads Indigenous Cultural Heritage CD-ROM; ANTA Toolbox Retail Certificate II Prototype for Online Delivery Systems; ANTA Toolbox Retail Certificate III Online CD-ROM Hybrid; Senior First Aid Certificate Online CD-ROM Hybrid; and the University of Queensland, Research Multimedia CD-ROM tool for evaluating the motivations of young motor vehicle offenders.

11 Production of the videos, which should have been relatively easy, was traumatic. One law student hired specifically for the project quit unexpectedly even though the student had committed to work for the life of the project. (Lesson one: withhold payment or have the team member sign an entire contract). One actor who was central to the plot was hospitalised which resulted in the loss of two actors (the care giver of the hospitalised actor was himself an actor). A third actor collapsed with a stroke just before the filming began. Several actors, who had to be hired last minute, had to learn the lines as the filming progressed (For example, the actor who plays the doctor in “A Family Affair” was actually the Project Evaluator). Several scenes in one video were rewritten overnight because other scenes had to be cut because of problems with some of the actors.
 The process of filming itself was trying. The University administrative staff initially refused to give us permission to use the only appropriate office on campus for filming. The urinals in the toilet scene in “Securing the Tender” were on automatic “flush,” making filming in the men’s washroom impossible. Unexpected problems were encountered with noise, door locks, and the like on almost all the sets.

12 I learned about the quality of Launchpad’s work from viewing a CD-ROM that they had produced. My confidence in their work increased after meeting with them and viewing other products that they had developed.

13 Wayne Ransley, formerly of the Faculty of Education, University of Tasmania, is a freelance consultant and software developer.

14 Laurillard states that “the design of any learning materials for any medium should always begin with the definition of objectives and analysis of student learning needs.” Laurillard, supra note 1, at 182. In the CD-ROM section entitled “About the programme” are listed the learning outcomes for the educational package, an introduction to the package, information about its development and use, a list of resources and references, and a caution about issues of definition, jurisdictional limitations, and the scope of the law covered in the CD-ROM. The programme overall includes adaptive, interactive, and reflective features which centre around the two video storylines. See Laurillard, supra note 1, at 203.

15 Thus demonstrating to users what effective learning can entail.

16 Justin Oakley of Monash University, Melbourne and Ian Thompson, formerly of the University of Notre Dame, Perth had participated in the legal ethics teaching workshops held in 1999 and, thereafter, they agreed to contribute to the educational package. Thompson’s section includes a decision-making model that users can employ to resolve ethical problems as well as introductory information on what ethics is and is not. Oakley’s provides an overview of ethics.

17 Most of the game section was written by Scull.

18 Written by Scull.

19 Pilot user response to the inclusion of these “creatures” has been enthusiastic.

20 GE Dal Pont, Lawyers’ Professional Responsibility in Australia and New Zealand (Sydney: Law Book, 1996); Y Ross, Ethics in Law: Lawyers’ Responsibility and Accountability in Australia (3rd ed) (Sydney: Butterworths, 2000); S Ross & P MacFarlane, Lawyers’ Responsibility and Accountability: Cases, Problems, and Commentary (Sydney: Butterworths, 1997).

21 One of the problems of producing a CD-ROM package is that once pressed, it cannot keep pace with change (eg the publication of new texts). This could have been achieved, however, with the creation of a complementary web site.

22 My aim was to produce a package for users who would have no or minimal opportunity to receive formal teaching in legal ethics and professional responsibility (since LE/PR education is only of recent vintage in the LLB curriculum in Australia).

23 I was most fortunate to find a team of people who were as generous, patient, understanding, and committed as the staff at Launchpad.

24 Launchpad told me that from their perspective one of the most pleasing results of the work on this project was working on an innovative product with a proactive client.

25 Some example: Bates, supra note 2; S Bosak & J Sloman, The CD-ROM Book, rev by D Gibbons (Indianapolis: QUE, 1994); T de Jong & L Sarti (eds), Design and Production of Multimedia and Simulation-Based Learning Material (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1994); P Fenrich, Practical Guidelines for Creating Instructional Multimedia Applications (Fort Worth: Dryden Press, Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1997); RA Schwier & ER Misanchuk, Interactive Multimedia Instruction (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications, 1993); T Yager, The Multimedia Production Handbook for the PC, Macintosh, and Amiga (Boston: Academic Press Professional, 1993).
 For some relatively recent law and technology articles see M Chetwin & C Edgar, Legal Education in the Technology Revolution: The Evolutionary Nature of Computer-Assisted Learning (1999) 10 Leg Ed Rev 163; A Paliwala, Leila’s Working Day: One of the Futures for Legal Education (2000) 34 Law Teacher 1; JE Zanglein & KA Stalcup, Te(a)chnology: Web-Based Instruction in Legal Skills Courses (1999) 49 J of Leg Educ 480.

26 On reflection, I think that the progress of the CD-ROM would have been faster had we all been working near one another geographically so that we could sit down over a cup of coffee, and I could actually point on the screen and describe what was on my mind. Ryan and Weyand from Launchpad disagree with me on this point. They do not believe that distance is a major factor in timely production because they are involved with many projects that are successfully constructed over substantial distances. While there can be some delays at the end when complete products are being shipped, these are not substantial.
 This difference of perception is possibly due to my lack of comfort with modern technology and preference for a more personalised work situation which proved impossible because of my move to Hong Kong.

27 That same member recently confessed just recently how she is missing making videos. Something about involvement in that creative process is addictive.

28 Lawry Scull, Carmel Leonard, and William Powell.

29 Laurillard, supra note 1 provides clear suggestions on the “how to’s” and the “why” in chapter 12 of her book.

30 Alternatively, know your limits, whether they are financial or otherwise. Accept a gracious defeat, if need be. Having said that, though, “Ethics, Conscience, and Professionalism: Rediscovering the Heart of Law” was short-listed by the Australian Interactive Multimedia Industry Association at their 7th Annual Industry Awards for “Best Higher Education Title of Site” for multi-media teaching/learning package.