Loading...
The council of the ABA’s Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar has decided to delay its proposal to eliminate the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) requirement, following letters from several law school deans expressing concerns. The decision was made during a council meeting held in Chicago on Friday.
Earlier this year, a resolution to remove the entrance exam requirement from Standard 503 was rejected by the ABA House of Delegates in February. However, less than two weeks later, the council voted to resubmit the proposal at the 2023 ABA Annual Meeting in August.
The proposal to eliminate the admissions test requirement has sparked a significant debate, with both proponents and opponents arguing about its potential impact on diversity in legal education. Some law deans suggested revising Standard 503 to admit no more than 25% of an entering class without an entrance exam instead of completely removing the requirement. They also requested an evaluation of the revision’s effectiveness within six years to ensure it does not harm law students and graduates. Over 100 law school deans signed this letter, showing their support for the proposed 25% plan.
On the other hand, a letter dated April 13 signed by 14 women of color who lead ABA-accredited law schools stated that the data does not support the argument that eliminating the admissions test requirement would enhance diversity in the legal profession. These deans expressed their support for the compromise proposal outlined in the April 12 letter.
Join the largest legal job site and sign up for LawCrossing today.
According to Bill Adams, managing director of ABA accreditation and legal education, alternative policies and practices could better determine law school applicants’ potential success. Adams mentioned that while the council believes the proposed amendments to Standards 501 and 503 offer the right approach to allow flexibility in admissions policies, they want to address the concerns raised by law school deans and stakeholders. The council’s decision to pause the process will allow for evaluating these concerns and determining the best course of action for law schools and applicants.
Get JD Journal in Your Mail
Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!
Law schools currently use the LSAT and the GRE as admissions exams. Kellye Testy, president and CEO of the Law School Admission Council, responsible for the LSAT, welcomed the council’s decision to explore alternative approaches to promote access and opportunity in law school admissions. Testy expressed willingness to assist the council in considering alternative policies.
In addition to the admissions test requirement, the council discussed other matters during the meeting. They approved proposed language changes related to standards noncompliance for notice and comment. These changes aim to clarify the definition of “probation” to signify that a law school is at risk of losing accreditation due to noncompliance with standards. The council also approved suggested revisions to Rule 15, which deals with sanctions, to include specific sanctions and their triggers.
Furthermore, the council approved proposed revisions to allow more distance education credits for law schools, pending review by the House of Delegates in August. The suggested changes would increase the percentage of JD program credit hours that can be completed online without ABA approval from one-third to up to 50%. The revisions also emphasize the importance of quality in distance education, such as using technology that supports learning outcomes and providing training for students and faculty.
The council’s decision to pause the proposal to eliminate the admissions test requirement demonstrates their willingness to address concerns raised by law school deans and stakeholders. The debate surrounding this issue continues, with different viewpoints on the potential impact on diversity in legal education. The council will further evaluate the proposed amendments and determine the most appropriate approach for law schools and their applicants.
