
By Lee Hansen, Liz Curran and Liz Fisher-Frank
In our paper presentation titled ‘A Case for the Ambitious Use of Giving Voice to Values Throughout Legal Education’, at the recent conference of the International Journal of Clinical Legal Education and European Network of Clinical Legal Education at the University of Amsterdam 22 – 24 July 2004, my colleague Liz Fisher Frank and I, along with Liz Curran from Nottingham Law School, had the pleasure of sharing insights on the transformative potential of the Giving Voice to Values (GVV) methodology in legal education, emphasising its role in promoting ethical decision-making and behaviour among future legal professionals.
This paper draws from the presenters’ research interests in the pedagogy of clinical legal education. GVV is a ripe method for navigating values conflicts related to access to justice, a key area of research interest for all three presenters. The link between these two fields is explored at Essex, where Liz and I frequently use access to justice-based scenarios in our GVV teaching to help students effectively manage values conflicts concerning access to justice.
GVV, developed by Mary Gentile, was originally created within the context of business schools to address ethical challenges. It has now been successfully applied in various fields, including legal education, nursing, social work and the paramedical context. Being experienced in applying GVV across these domains, we advocated for its broad use in legal education. We underscored the necessity of preparing law students to tackle everyday challenges they will encounter in practice, arguing that traditional legal education may emphasise moral sensitivity and judgment while neglecting the crucial elements of moral motivation and courage.
In our workshop we made the case for a more expansive use of GVV throughout the legal curriculum, highlighting its capacity to provide law students with the tools to manage and prepare for values conflicts that may arise in their professional lives.
Implementing the GVV Approach in Legal Education
An important aspect of the discussion addressed the need to teach GVV responsibly. We recognised the potential harms that can flow to individuals in whistleblowing situations such as professional retaliation, personal stress and isolation. We emphasised that while GVV equips students with the skills to navigate these types of situations, it is also crucial to address the risks and challenges involved. This responsible approach ensures that students are not only prepared to voice their values but also understand the potential consequences and develop strategies to mitigate harm.
We also explored strategies for integrating GVV across various areas of legal education, including commercial awareness, human rights, employment law, and interdisciplinary studies. We argued that GVV’s principles are quite versatile and can enhance students’ understanding and engagement across these subjects. By embedding GVV in diverse courses, law schools can create a comprehensive, values-driven curriculum that thoroughly prepares students for their future roles as ethical practitioners.
The session also addressed practical considerations such as assessment and resource implications. We highlighted the importance of developing effective assessment methods to evaluate students’ understanding and application of GVV principles.
Reflective Exercise and Discussion
During the session, audience members expressed how their perspectives were changed by the frameworks presented. Members who had transitioned from legal practice to academia remarked that having these frameworks during their time in practice would have been incredibly useful. Participants were encouraged to engage in a practical exercise, where they practised initiating and navigating conversations about values conflicts.
This exercise aimed to build participants’ confidence and competence in addressing ethical issues. The exercise involved role-playing scenarios where participants were tasked with navigating an ethical challenge that they might encounter in their professional lives. In the scenario, participants played the roles of junior lawyers facing pressure from senior partners to engage in questionable practices. The participants had to identify their values, articulate their concerns and develop strategies to voice their objections effectively while maintaining professional relationships.
This role-playing activity not only highlighted the complexities of real-world ethical decision-making but also demonstrated GVV’s potential to empower individuals to act on their values. By providing a safe space for practice, the exercise showcased how law students and professionals could rehearse their responses to ethical challenges and build their confidence accordingly.
Reflective practice was also emphasised, with participants sharing their experiences and discussing what strategies worked, what didn’t and how they might approach similar situations differently in the future. This hands-on approach reinforced the importance of preparation and rehearsal in developing the skills needed for ethical practice.
The session concluded with a lively discussion on the ambitious use of GVV in legal education. Participants debated the merits and challenges of implementing GVV, sharing their perspectives on how this methodology could transform legal education and practice. Participants were keen to learn more about GVV, and indicated they may think about implementing it in their work; taking these frameworks back to diverse jurisdictions from all over the world.
We emphasised that a values-driven approach not only prepares students for the ethical complexities of legal practice but also cultivates a commitment to justice and integrity that will benefit the legal profession and society as a whole



