Assessments All the Way Down

The Green Bag Pub Date : 2018-06-21 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.3200706
James Mcgrath, Andrew P. Morriss
{"title":"Assessments All the Way Down","authors":"James Mcgrath, Andrew P. Morriss","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3200706","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The role of assessments is getting attention throughout legal education. A growing acceptance of the Graduate Record Examination (“GRE”) as an alternative to the Law School Aptitude Test (“LSAT”) and its incorporation into the U.S. News & World Report (“USN&WR”) law school rankings opened the door to changes in who is going to law school and how they are recruited. At the other end of students’ journey through legal education, the discussion of recent graduates’ bar exam performance – linked by some to declining LSAT scores of entering students – raised questions about the design of bar exams as well as about law schools’ preparation of graduates for the bar. In between, the American Bar Association’s incorporation of assessment into its accreditation process spurred growing interest in how law schools conduct assessments and is prompting changes in how legal educators evaluate students. In this article, we begin with the issues raised by the GRE’s appearance as an alternate pathway. Next, we set out assessment principles likely to influence future conversations in the legal academy. Then we look at how the bar results discussion connects to improving assessment strategies. Finally, we conclude with speculation about what this all means.","PeriodicalId":245319,"journal":{"name":"The Green Bag","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Green Bag","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3200706","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The role of assessments is getting attention throughout legal education. A growing acceptance of the Graduate Record Examination (“GRE”) as an alternative to the Law School Aptitude Test (“LSAT”) and its incorporation into the U.S. News & World Report (“USN&WR”) law school rankings opened the door to changes in who is going to law school and how they are recruited. At the other end of students’ journey through legal education, the discussion of recent graduates’ bar exam performance – linked by some to declining LSAT scores of entering students – raised questions about the design of bar exams as well as about law schools’ preparation of graduates for the bar. In between, the American Bar Association’s incorporation of assessment into its accreditation process spurred growing interest in how law schools conduct assessments and is prompting changes in how legal educators evaluate students. In this article, we begin with the issues raised by the GRE’s appearance as an alternate pathway. Next, we set out assessment principles likely to influence future conversations in the legal academy. Then we look at how the bar results discussion connects to improving assessment strategies. Finally, we conclude with speculation about what this all means.
一直向下评估
评估的作用在整个法律教育中越来越受到重视。研究生入学考试(GRE)被越来越多的人接受,作为法学院能力倾向测试(LSAT)的替代方案,并将其纳入《美国新闻与世界报道》(USN&WR)法学院排名,这为法学院的招生和招生方式的变化打开了大门。在学生的法律教育之旅的另一端,关于近期毕业生律师资格考试表现的讨论——一些人将其与入学学生的LSAT分数下降联系起来——引发了对律师资格考试设计以及法学院为毕业生准备律师资格的质疑。在此期间,美国律师协会将评估纳入其认证过程,这激发了人们对法学院如何进行评估的兴趣,并促使法律教育者评估学生的方式发生了变化。在本文中,我们从GRE作为替代途径的出现所引起的问题开始。接下来,我们列出了可能影响法律学院未来对话的评估原则。然后我们看看酒吧结果讨论如何与改进评估策略联系起来。最后,我们对这一切意味着什么进行推测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信