Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Open access Journal

Improving Law Student Ability on Legal Writing through Critical and Logical Thinking by IRAC Method

Indonesian Journal of Advocacy and Legal Services · Vol. 1 No. 1 (2019) · pp. 107–128

DOI
10.15294/ijals.v1i1.22799
ISSN
2686-2611, 2686-2085
Published
2019-09-15
Publisher
Universitas Negeri Semarang
Language
eng
License
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0

Abstract

The lack of good stigma is attached to student activists, ranging from the unsatisfactory level of academic quality, graduating on time, not responsive and very reactive, hard and opposing views, to demonstrations that are colored by violence. The stigma is only in a few cases, not all activists face such conditions, but this stigma seems to have been far attached. The development of student activists today demands that activists must also have three literacy abilities: data literacy, humanitarian literacy, and technological literacy. However, based on the preliminary results of this activity, 90 percent of UNNES Law School student activists agreed that activists must have a critical attitude and critical writing skills, but only about 10 percent of activists who had taken it seriously (thought publications in various forms). This activity is aimed at developing the critical abilities of student activists through increased publications in various media. This activity also aims to establish a critical writing community for student activists and present a concrete forum for channeling ideas and solutions for student activists in writing that can be read by many people. This activity is carried out through a critical thinking approach in legal studies using the IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) method which is commonly used in analyzing various cases in legal study thinking.

Keywords

Collaboration network of the authors

40 authors · 177 co-authorship links · showing the 40 most connected

Hover or tap a name to highlight its co-authors. Double-click to open the author's page.

  • Affiliation unknown
  • Different organisations
  • Same organisation
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Thicker line = more joint articles · bigger circle = more articles
Show as table
Co-authorOrganisationJoint articles
Bayangsari WedhatamiAffiliation unknown16
Rasdi RasdiAffiliation unknown15
Waspiah WaspiahAffiliation unknown13
Anis WidyawatiAffiliation unknown11
Nadiyah Meyliana PutriAffiliation unknown10
Ngboawaji Daniel NteAffiliation unknown9
Dian LatifianiAffiliation unknown9
Septhian Eka AdiyatmaAffiliation unknown9
Muhammad Iqbal BaiquniAffiliation unknown9
Rodiyah RodiyahAffiliation unknown8
Bintang Rafli AnantaAffiliation unknown8
Indah Sri UtariAffiliation unknown7
Ali MasyharAffiliation unknown6
Nurul FibriantiAffiliation unknown6
Zainurohmah ZainurohmahAffiliation unknown6
Fitria DamayantiAffiliation unknown6
Muhammad Wahyu Saiful HudaAffiliation unknown6
Asyaffa Ridzqi AmandhaAffiliation unknown5
Riki JuliantoAffiliation unknown5
Muhammad Azil MaskurAffiliation unknown4
Sonny Saptoajie WicaksonoAffiliation unknown4
R Benny RiyantoAffiliation unknown4
Karsinah KarsinahAffiliation unknown4
Ngaboawaji Daniel NteAffiliation unknown4
Hafizh Daffa SetiawanAffiliation unknown4
Robert Brian SmithAffiliation unknown4
Ahsana NadiyyaAffiliation unknown3
Asmarani RamliAffiliation unknown3
Layla Putri AulyaAffiliation unknown3
Raden Muhammad Arvy IlyasaAffiliation unknown3
Heni RosidaAffiliation unknown3
Siti Hafsyah IdrisAffiliation unknown3
Umi AfiatunAffiliation unknown3
Izan Mateo CassandroAffiliation unknown3
Mohammed ErhumaAffiliation unknown3

Affiliations come from OpenAlex; journal OAI-PMH metadata carries none. Authors without an OpenAlex ID are matched by name, which can merge or split people.

Metadata source: OAI-PMH (metadata jurnal) https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/ijals/oai, first harvested 5 Nov 2026, last seen 5 Nov 2026.
Original metadata (oai_dc)
<oai_dc:dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/  http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
	<dc:title xml:lang="en">Improving Law Student Ability on Legal Writing through Critical and Logical Thinking by IRAC Method</dc:title>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Arifin, Ridwan</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Alkadri, Riska</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Sari, Dewi Puspa</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Resthiningsih, Lilies</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Holish, Amarru Muftie</dc:creator>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">student activists; critical thinking;publications;legal writing</dc:subject>
	<dc:description xml:lang="en">The lack of good stigma is attached to student activists, ranging from the unsatisfactory level of academic quality, graduating on time, not responsive and very reactive, hard and opposing views, to demonstrations that are colored by violence. The stigma is only in a few cases, not all activists face such conditions, but this stigma seems to have been far attached. The development of student activists today demands that activists must also have three literacy abilities: data literacy, humanitarian literacy, and technological literacy. However, based on the preliminary results of this activity, 90 percent of UNNES Law School student activists agreed that activists must have a critical attitude and critical writing skills, but only about 10 percent of activists who had taken it seriously (thought publications in various forms). This activity is aimed at developing the critical abilities of student activists through increased publications in various media. This activity also aims to establish a critical writing community for student activists and present a concrete forum for channeling ideas and solutions for student activists in writing that can be read by many people. This activity is carried out through a critical thinking approach in legal studies using the IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) method which is commonly used in analyzing various cases in legal study thinking.</dc:description>
	<dc:publisher xml:lang="en">Universitas Negeri Semarang</dc:publisher>
	<dc:date>2019-09-15</dc:date>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dc:type>
	<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
	<dc:identifier>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/ijals/article/view/22799</dc:identifier>
	<dc:identifier>10.15294/ijals.v1i1.22799</dc:identifier>
	<dc:source xml:lang="en">Indonesian Journal of Advocacy and Legal Services; Vol. 1 No. 1 (2019): Strengthening Community and Legal Sector in Indonesia; 107-128</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2686-2611</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2686-2085</dc:source>
	<dc:source>10.15294/ijals.v1i1</dc:source>
	<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
	<dc:relation>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/ijals/article/view/22799/3383</dc:relation>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0</dc:rights>
</oai_dc:dc>