Просмотр новости
Найдите то, что Вас интересует
Спутники
РН
SpaceX
Роскосмос
NASA
СпутникиРНSpaceXРоскосмосNASABy Susannah PollvogtIn this blog post, I’m going to discuss a technique I use with law schools to avoid developing purely aspirational, unassessable programmatic learning outcomes.As we know, revised ABA Standard 302 — which goes into effect for the 2027-2028 academic year — requires law schools to develop learning outcomes on the program level as well as the course level, and the Council1 has placed a new emphasis on assessment via Standards 315 and 204. It is now clear that law schools must assess (i.e., evaluate) on an ongoing basis whether students are attaining the competencies represented by a law school’s programmatic learning outcomes and report on the results of this assessment in conjunction with the law school’s site visit.As a result, law schools are revisiting their programmatic learning outcomes to make sure that they comport with ABA Standard 302(a) and the law school’s own mission. Unfortunately, I see many law schools developing programmatic learning outcomes that are not assessable — that is, student attainment of the competencies cannot actually be measured. For example, a law school might have a programmatic learning outcome that states, “Students will uphold a strong sense of honor,” or “Students will develop a love of the law.”Let me be clear — these are wonderful goals. But they are what I call “aspirational learning outcomes.” They describe qualities that a law school may want to see in its graduates, but that is different than describing competencies that can be observed and measured. There is room for both! But the former belongs in a statement of values, while only the latter should be framed as learning outcomes.The law schools I work with often find themselves in a bind — they have spent months (maybe years!) working on learning outcomes that faculty are deeply invested in, but when it comes time to assess student attainment of those learning outcomes, the school is at a loss. How do we know whether students are “upholding[ing] a strong sense of honor”? What observable behavior is associated with this goal? Where will this observable behavior manifest, and how will it be measured to determine when it is or is not present?For this reason, when I work with law schools on developing programmatic learning outcomes, I take the following approach:We identify the general categories of competency the faculty would like to address. These can be informed by ABA Standard 302(a), the law school’s mission, and/or feedback from employers. These are placeholders — things like, “legal analysis” or “professionalism.”We next identify the assessment evidence that is available to evaluate whether students have actually attained that competency. For example, if all students are required to take a clinic or participate in an externship, we might look there for evidence of professional demeanor. I also strongly encourage schools to consider what would be included in their assessment rubric at the very same time.Only then do we attempt to craft the language of the programmatic learning outcomes, informed by an awareness of the observable behavior we will be evaluating.By taking this approach, faculties can avoid purely aspirational learning outcomes and set themselves up for success when it comes time to develop an assessment plan.Along these lines, I stress that now is the time for your law school to develop an assessment plan — even if your site visit isn’t until sometime in the 2030s. This is because you will want to assess one to two learning outcomes yearly and make incremental improvements in response to what you learn. Attempting to assess all of your learning outcomes in the year leading up to the site visit will not only be impossible but defeats the purpose of assessment, which is to maintain an intentional awareness of whether your law school’s curriculum is achieving its goals.Please contact me if you would like to discuss developing measurable learning outcomes for your school, or would like assistance with assessment: spollvogt@LSAC.org [1] “The Council” refers to the Council for the Section for Legal Education and Admission to the Bar, the accrediting arm of the ABA.
| # | Наименование новости | Тональность | Информативность | Дата публикации |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Learning Outcomes Are a Promise | 0 | 5.71 | 03-03-2026 |
| 2 | Complying with ABA Standards 315 and 204: Questions and Answers | 0 | 9.8 | 19-02-2026 |
| 3 | From Aspirations to Game Plan: LSAC and AALS Collaborate to Study What Undergrads Aspire to Do After Graduation—and What They’re Doing About It | 0 | 10 | 12-05-2026 |
| 4 | Law School Enrollment Strategy in a Slowing Job Market | 0 | 7.13 | 09-03-2026 |
| 5 | Providing More Time for Schools and Candidates to Adjust to the LSAC GPA Changes | 0 | 11.1 | 18-08-2026 |
| 6 | LSAC and NALP Spotlight the Ripple Effects of Accelerated Recruiting Timelines | 0 | 12.1 | 11-06-2026 |
| 7 | The Job Market for New Law Grads Has Always Been About Supply and Demand | 0 | 8.98 | 13-08-2026 |
| 8 | The History of Big Law Recruitment Timelines | 0 | 9.64 | 11-06-2026 |
| 9 | Doing Good with Law: VIISTA As a Path for Immigration and Public Interest Lawyers | 0 | 11.1 | 26-01-2026 |
| 10 | LSAT Inbox — August 2026 Score Release and September 2026 LSAT | 0 | 7.26 | 20-08-2026 |