Law School Deans Aren’t Happy About the ABA’s Proposal for Uniform Courses

More than a third of U.S. law school deans oppose the American Bar Association proposal for greater uniformity in courses.

In a public comment, 76 law deans, including deans from law schools at New York University, Georgetown, and the University of Michigan, expressed concerns that the proposal could harm legal education and restrict academic freedom, Reuters reports.

“It is unclear why the ABA needs to micromanage law school curricula to such a degree,” the law deans state in the public comments.

PROPOSED CHANGES

The proposed changes include a requirement for law schools to adopt and publish specific learning goals for every class. Additionally, the proposed changes mandate that law schools must ensure alignment among required courses with multiple sections each term, often taught by multiple professors.

The proposal also mandates that all first-year classes incorporate an early assessment, providing students with feedback on their performance before the final exam.

PROPOSAL RECEIVES MIXED FEEDBACK

Supporters of the proposed changes argue that increased conformity would benefit students by providing more oversight and clarity in curricula. Critics argue that the proposal violates the academic freedom of professors to design their own courses. Additionally, some argue that it imposes a significant administrative burden on schools, requiring them to review and revise classes and academic programs every five years.

In their public comment, law deans characterized the proposal as the latest example of a recent trend within the ABA to “try and exercise greater regulatory control” over law schools.

The ABA’s legal education council is set to consider the proposal at its upcoming meeting on May 17.

Sources: Reuters, Reuters, American Association of Law Libraries

Next Page: Questions to ask law students and alumni.