Building a Culture of Assessment in Law Schools

Larry D. Cunningham
{"title":"Building a Culture of Assessment in Law Schools","authors":"Larry D. Cunningham","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3216804","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A new era of legal education is upon us: Law schools are now required to assess learning outcomes across their degrees and programs, not just in individual courses. Programmatic assessment is new to legal education, but it has existed in higher education for decades. To be successful, assessment requires cooperation and buy-in from faculty. Yet establishing a culture of assessment in other disciplines has not been easy, and there is no reason to believe that it will be any different in legal education. A survey of provosts identified faculty buy-in as the single biggest challenge towards implementing assessment efforts. This article surveys the literature on culture of assessment, including conceptual papers and quantitative and qualitative studies. It then draws ten themes from the literature about how to build a culture of assessment: (1) the purpose of assessment, which is a form of scholarship, is improving student learning, not just for satisfying accreditors; (2) assessment must be faculty-driven; (3) messaging and communication around assessment is critical, from the reasons for assessment through celebrating successes; (4) faculty should be provided professional development, including in their own graduate studies; (5) resources are important; (6) successes should be rewarded and recognized; (7) priority should be given to utilizing faculty’s existing assessment devices rather than employing externally developed tests; (8) the unique needs of contingent faculty and other populations should be considered; (9) to accomplish change, stakeholders should draw on theories of leadership, business, motivation, and the social process of innovation; and (10) student affairs should be integrated with faculty and academic assessment activities. These themes, if implemented by law schools, will help programmatic assessment to become an effective addition to legal education and not just something viewed as a regulatory burden.","PeriodicalId":80897,"journal":{"name":"Case Western Reserve law review","volume":"69 1","pages":"395"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Case Western Reserve law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3216804","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

A new era of legal education is upon us: Law schools are now required to assess learning outcomes across their degrees and programs, not just in individual courses. Programmatic assessment is new to legal education, but it has existed in higher education for decades. To be successful, assessment requires cooperation and buy-in from faculty. Yet establishing a culture of assessment in other disciplines has not been easy, and there is no reason to believe that it will be any different in legal education. A survey of provosts identified faculty buy-in as the single biggest challenge towards implementing assessment efforts. This article surveys the literature on culture of assessment, including conceptual papers and quantitative and qualitative studies. It then draws ten themes from the literature about how to build a culture of assessment: (1) the purpose of assessment, which is a form of scholarship, is improving student learning, not just for satisfying accreditors; (2) assessment must be faculty-driven; (3) messaging and communication around assessment is critical, from the reasons for assessment through celebrating successes; (4) faculty should be provided professional development, including in their own graduate studies; (5) resources are important; (6) successes should be rewarded and recognized; (7) priority should be given to utilizing faculty’s existing assessment devices rather than employing externally developed tests; (8) the unique needs of contingent faculty and other populations should be considered; (9) to accomplish change, stakeholders should draw on theories of leadership, business, motivation, and the social process of innovation; and (10) student affairs should be integrated with faculty and academic assessment activities. These themes, if implemented by law schools, will help programmatic assessment to become an effective addition to legal education and not just something viewed as a regulatory burden.
构建法学院评估文化
法律教育的新时代即将到来:法学院现在被要求评估其学位和课程的学习成果,而不仅仅是个别课程。程序性评估是法学教育中的一个新概念,但它在高等教育中已经存在了几十年。要想取得成功,评估需要教师的合作和支持。然而,在其他学科建立评估文化并不容易,也没有理由相信在法律教育中会有任何不同。一项针对教务长的调查发现,教师的支持是实施评估工作的最大挑战。本文综述了关于评估文化的文献,包括概念论文以及定量和定性研究。然后,它从文献中引出了关于如何建立评估文化的十个主题:(1)评估作为一种学术形式,其目的是改善学生的学习,而不仅仅是为了满足认证人员的要求;(2) 评估必须由教师驱动;(3) 从评估的原因到庆祝成功,围绕评估的信息传递和沟通至关重要;(4) 应为教师提供专业发展,包括他们自己的研究生学习;(5) 资源是重要的;(6) 成功应该得到奖励和认可;(7) 应优先利用教师现有的评估手段,而不是采用外部开发的测试;(8) 应考虑到师资队伍和其他人群的独特需求;(9) 为了实现变革,利益相关者应该借鉴领导力、商业、动机和社会创新过程的理论;(10)学生事务应与教师和学术评估活动相结合。如果法学院实施这些主题,将有助于方案评估成为法律教育的有效补充,而不仅仅是被视为监管负担的内容。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书