This article considers whether different types of Clinical Legal Education (CLE) programs have the same potential to provide a transformative learning experience for students. The author uses Mezirow’s theory to postulate that, although addressing a societal need, ‘missing middle’ Clinical Legal Education programs – those that assist middle-income Australians – may not provide the necessary environment, including an environment ripe for ‘disorienting dilemmas’, for transformative learning. After a comparison of missing middle clinics in Australia and poverty law clinics in the United States of America (US), the author suggests that disorienting dilemmas may only be offered by Clinical Legal Education programs aimed at assisting society’s most vulnerable people.
|Number of pages||6|
|Journal||Alternative Law Journal|
|Early online date||22 Jan 2019|
|Publication status||Published - 1 Sep 2019|