If nothing else, the denial of University of La Verne's application for full ABA approval tells us one thing: complying with Interpretation 301-6 does not mean that you comply with Standard 301. We should have been paying closer attention to Standard 301(a):
A law school shall maintain an educational program that prepares its students for admission to the bar, and effective and responsible participation in the legal profession. (Emphasis added.)
Just in case we're not clear on that, the draft of Standard 301 that will be considered by the Standards Review Committee this coming weekend (July 9-10, 2011) numbers it: "... (1) admission to the bar, and (2) effective ...." It then hammers the point home in new Interpretation 301-1, which would replace all existing Interpretations of Standard 301, except for (a renumbered) 301-6. Proposed Interpretation 301-1 reads:
The Standards in this chapter are designed to ensure that the law school’s educational program is rigorous and prepares its students both to be admitted to the bar and then, once admitted, to participate effectively, ethically, and responsibly in the legal profession. Because bar passage rates principally reflect how well a law school prepares its students for admission to the bar, an acceptable bar passage rate is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition to comply with these standards. To demonstrate how well it prepares its students for admission to the bar but also how well it prepares them for effective, ethical and responsible participation in the legal profession, the law school will need to use a variety of additional means to demonstrate compliance with these standards. (Emphasis added.)
In The ABA, the DoE and 301-6, I explained that the ABA itself has to be accredited as an accreditor, and that the ABA had been put on the equivalent of report-back" status because some of its Standards, including those with respect to job placement were not transparent:
The agency reports that it evaluates placement rates as part of its assessment of student achievement, but does not provide information about its expectations for placement or the criteria by which it evaluates an institution’s or program’s performance in this area.
* * *
Although the agency collects graduate placement data, there is no evidence that the agency has a standard indicating what compliance means, if it uses placement as a factor to determine student achievement. * * *
* * * The agency needs to demonstrate its expectation regarding job placement data it collects. (pg. 8 of DoE Staff report on ABA)(p. 166 overall). (Emphasis added.)
And so here. Apart from vague descriptors--rigorous, effective, ethical, responsible--by what other, "additional," means, and using which measures, does (or will) the ABA determine whether a law school properly prepares its students for participation in the profession?
For the future, of course, Chapter 3 of the Standards will be chock-full of outcome measures--or at least references to outcome measures. But how about now? How about last month?
"Enquiring minds want to know." I'm sure La Verne does.
Comments