"Towards pluralistic legal minds: pedagogical theories underpinning teaching of comparative legal research methodology" offers a theoretically grounded reconsideration of how comparative legal research methods should be taught in contemporary legal education. The authors contend that traditional approaches, which treat comparative methodology as a technical exercise in identifying similarities and differences between legal systems, are insufficient for preparing scholars and practitioners for the epistemic challenges posed by legal pluralism and cross-jurisdictional research.

The article frames the teaching of comparative legal research within broader pedagogical theories that foreground critical reflection, epistemic humility, and engagement with diverse normative traditions. Rather than positioning the method as neutral, it suggests that educators should explicitly address the implicit assumptions shaping comparative inquiry, including the power relations embedded in legal knowledge production and the situated standpoints of researchers.

Central to the authors’ argument is the notion of a pluralistic legal mind: a researcher who not only understands methodological tools but also appreciates the plurality of legal orders, concepts, and reasoning frameworks. Pedagogical strategies recommended include dialogical learning, reflexive exercises that surface researchers’ positionalities, and curricula that incorporate engagement with non-state and hybrid normative systems. These approaches seek to transform comparative methodology from a procedural skill into an intellectual disposition suited to pluralistic research contexts.

By situating comparative legal research methodology within a pluralist and critical pedagogical frame, the article contributes to ongoing debates on legal research training and enriches the Commission’s discourse on preparing scholars to navigate complex normative landscapes.