Scholarlink

<p>The growing presence of artificial intelligence (AI) in legal practice has intensified the need for legal education to address technological change without displacing core disciplinary competencies. As law students increasingly encounter AI-mediated tools and automated decision environments, legal education must continue to foreground structured legal reasoning, procedural understanding, interpretive judgment, and professional responsibility. In this context, this article examines the pedagogical potential of flowcharts as tools for making legal reasoning more visible and for supporting critical engagement with AI-related decision structures in legal education. This conceptual article is based on a critical synthesis of recent literature on artificial intelligence in legal education, AI literacy, and pedagogical approaches to structured reasoning. It explores how flowcharts can support the externalization of legal reasoning, the visualization of procedural logic, and students’ reflective engagement with technology-mediated legal processes. Rather than focusing on specific AI applications, the article emphasizes an accessible pedagogical strategy aimed at fostering transparency, active learning, and critical awareness. The article argues that flowcharts can function not merely as instructional diagrams but as mediating pedagogical tools that help students examine how legal reasoning may be structured, formalized, and translated into automated environments. At the same time, it stresses that legal reasoning cannot be reduced to procedural logic alone, since interpretation, contextual judgment, and normative evaluation remain central to legal education and professional practice. By framing flowcharts in this way, the article contributes to current debates on AI-mediated legal education and on how AI literacy may be developed while preserving the human and disciplinary dimensions of legal reasoning. More broadly, this challenge is also pedagogical, since the educational significance of AI depends not only on access to tools, but on how learners are supported in making sense of technologically mediated forms of reasoning and decision-making (Zhang &amp; Aslan, <CitationRef CitationID="CR18">2021</CitationRef>; Marsico &amp; Dazzani, <CitationRef CitationID="CR11">2024</CitationRef>).</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Visualizing Legal Reasoning in AI-Mediated Contexts: Flowcharts as Pedagogical Tools in Legal Education

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月7日

查看全文
  • Carla de Paredes-Gallardo,
  • Borja Pérez-Beltrán,
  • Esther García-Miralles,
  • Juan Ignacio Aura-Tormos

摘要

The growing presence of artificial intelligence (AI) in legal practice has intensified the need for legal education to address technological change without displacing core disciplinary competencies. As law students increasingly encounter AI-mediated tools and automated decision environments, legal education must continue to foreground structured legal reasoning, procedural understanding, interpretive judgment, and professional responsibility. In this context, this article examines the pedagogical potential of flowcharts as tools for making legal reasoning more visible and for supporting critical engagement with AI-related decision structures in legal education. This conceptual article is based on a critical synthesis of recent literature on artificial intelligence in legal education, AI literacy, and pedagogical approaches to structured reasoning. It explores how flowcharts can support the externalization of legal reasoning, the visualization of procedural logic, and students’ reflective engagement with technology-mediated legal processes. Rather than focusing on specific AI applications, the article emphasizes an accessible pedagogical strategy aimed at fostering transparency, active learning, and critical awareness. The article argues that flowcharts can function not merely as instructional diagrams but as mediating pedagogical tools that help students examine how legal reasoning may be structured, formalized, and translated into automated environments. At the same time, it stresses that legal reasoning cannot be reduced to procedural logic alone, since interpretation, contextual judgment, and normative evaluation remain central to legal education and professional practice. By framing flowcharts in this way, the article contributes to current debates on AI-mediated legal education and on how AI literacy may be developed while preserving the human and disciplinary dimensions of legal reasoning. More broadly, this challenge is also pedagogical, since the educational significance of AI depends not only on access to tools, but on how learners are supported in making sense of technologically mediated forms of reasoning and decision-making (Zhang & Aslan, 2021; Marsico & Dazzani, 2024).