授課人在教學現場觀察到一個奇妙的現象，亦即「老師的教學受有非常高度評價」，而且「學生們具有高度學習參與與學習動機」但卻仍然只有「低度學習成效」的產出。這個觀察，顯然是反於一般論所認知的常識。授課人申請通過之109實踐研究（教育部教學研究計畫題目：以『排除跨課程系統性學習障礙』為目的之『融貫式槓桿課程』對法律系學生高階能力養成之有效性研究）之目的即在於釐清此一反常現象之成因並探究其對策。經109實踐研究實證發現，系統性學習障礙之最顯著病徵，體現在學生們（全部履修者，不論年級）皆有一個共同的學習盲點，亦即「只要面對嶄新劇情的實例題就無法看出爭點」（換言之，他們只能解決課堂上已經講授過同樣劇情之實例題）。於此意義上，授課人認為，渠等之問題根源所在，係第一層次之障礙（看不出爭點，也就是不認識問題），既然不認識問題，理所當然地無法正常發揮其已經習得的法理（第二層次）。然而，事實上，該「嶄新劇情」的實例題，雖曰「嶄新」，但並非意味著學生們沒有學習過該實例題「應適用之法理」，而是指該實例題在「事實爭點上」採「跨週次」乃至於「跨年級」進行設計（例如，大三刑事訴訟法科之實例題內，會含有大一與大二刑法總則與刑法分則的考點，由此設定嶄新劇情之實例題），以至於他們初見該實例題，往往「誤以為自己沒有學過」。事實上，在學校所舉辦的課程教學評鑑中，也有幾位同學在開放性問答中誤行指摘「期中、期末考難度過高與課堂關聯性低」。實際上，此一指摘卻與事實不符，因為解答該題目所需運用的法理，課堂上已經詳細講授且舉出相當多實例題加以具體解說。此一誤行指摘，顯然係出於「誤以為自己沒有學過」之跨週次的系統性學習障礙（即無法將各週次所學融會貫通）所致。而有趣的是，待老師演示如何解題後，學生們便會顯露出「赫然發現，啊！原來自己學過呀！」的（微驚嚇）表情，與此同時，會異口同聲地低呼一聲「哦～」，然後接著露出「可惜啊！我應該會的呀！」的（很悔恨）表情。此即109實踐研究所稱「系統性學習障礙」之最為顯著的具體表徵之展現。申言之，109實踐研究實證發現，學生們（履修者全員）之學習皆係以週次為單位，而學習視野也侷限於以期中考，期末考為分區，一但跨週次乃至於跨年級，他們便無法融會貫通。且不僅僅是跨課程之間（大一的刑總、大二的刑分，大三的刑訴，大四的專題講座）有系統性學系障礙，即便是同一課程之內，也有跨週次（或是跨期中考、期末考）的系統性學習障礙。換言之，同學們係循著教學週次或教科書章節，進行片斷性學習而欠缺系統性學習的觀念，自然也就不可能進行系統性學習。為此，授課人特開設本課程，擬以體系式之案例研究與實作來克服系統性學習障礙，如此便能達成法學「高階能力」之養成與深化。

The instructor observed a wonderful phenomenon at the teaching site, that is, "teachers' teaching is highly praised" and "students are highly engaged and motivated" but still only produce "low learning effectiveness". This observation is obviously contrary to common sense. The purpose of the 109 Practical Research (Teaching Research Project Title of the Ministry of Education: Research on the Effectiveness of "Integrated Leverage Curriculum" for the Development of Higher-order Abilities of Law Students with the Purpose of "Eliminating Systemic Learning Obstacles across Curriculums") applied for by the instructor is to clarify the causes of this abnormal phenomenon and explore countermeasures. Through 109 practical studies, it has been found that the most significant symptom of systemic learning disabilities is that students (all students, regardless of grade) have a common learning blind spot, that is, "they cannot see the point of the problem as long as they face example problems with a new plot" (in other words, they can only solve example problems with the same plot that have been taught in class). In this sense, the instructor believes that the root of their problems lies in the first level of obstacles (not being able to see the point of contention, that is, not understanding the problem). Since they do not understand the problem, it is natural that they cannot use the legal principles they have learned normally (the second level). However, in fact, although the example question of the "new plot" is called "new", it does not mean that the students have not studied the "applicable legal principles" of the example question, but it means that the example question is "across weeks" or even "across grades" on the "factual issues". Design (for example, the example questions of the Criminal Procedure Law course of the junior year will include the test points of the general principles and sub-principles of criminal law of the freshman and sophomore years, thereby setting up example questions of a new plot), so that when they first see the example questions, they often "mistakenly think that they have not learned it." In fact, in the course teaching evaluation held by the school, several students mistakenly criticized "the midterm and final exams were too difficult and had low relevance to the classroom" in the open question and answer session. In fact, this accusation is inconsistent with the facts, because the legal principles required to answer this question have been taught in detail in class and many examples have been cited for detailed explanation. This accusation of misbehavior is obviously caused by a systematic learning disorder across weeks (that is, the inability to integrate what has been learned in each week) due to the "mistaken belief that one has not learned". What's interesting is that after the teacher demonstrates how to solve the problem, the students will show a (slightly frightened) expression of "I'm surprised to find out, ah! I have learned it before!". At the same time, they will whisper "Oh~" in unison, and then show a (very regretful) expression of "What a pity! I should know it!" This is the most striking and specific manifestation of what 109 Practice Research Institute calls "systemic learning disabilities." To put it bluntly, 109 practical research has found that students (all students) study in weeks, and their learning horizons are limited to mid-term exams and final exams. Once it crosses weeks or even grades, they cannot integrate it. And there are not only systematic academic barriers across courses (freshman criminal justice, sophomore criminal justice, junior criminal prosecution, senior special lectures), but even within the same course, there are also systemic learning barriers across weeks (or across mid-term exams, final exams). In other words, students follow the teaching weeks or textbook chapters and conduct fragmentary learning without the concept of systematic learning. Naturally, systematic learning is impossible. For this reason, the instructor has specially created this course, intending to use systematic case studies and implementation to overcome systemic learning obstacles, so as to achieve the development and deepening of "high-level abilities" in law.

1.劉芳伶自編教材以及指定參考文獻。
2.http://fjudkm.judicial.gov.tw/(司法智識庫)
3.http://jirs.judicial.gov.tw/Index.htm(司法院法學資料檢索系統)
4.Lexis Advance 法學檢索系統
5.Westlaw International (Westlaw法律新聞全文資料庫)

1. Liu Fanling’s self-edited textbooks and designated references.
2.http://fjudkm.judicial.gov.tw/(Judicial Knowledge Base)
3.http://jirs.judicial.gov.tw/Index.htm (Judicial Yuan legal information retrieval system)
4. Lexis Advance law search system
5.Westlaw International (Full-text database of Westlaw legal news)