Просмотр новости
Найдите то, что Вас интересует
Спутники
РН
SpaceX
Роскосмос
NASA
Learning Outcomes Are a Promise
Дата публикации: 03-03-2026 00:00:00
By Susannah PollvogtLearning goals are promises that we make to our students, their families, employers, and society that every student who . . . graduates with this degree can do the things we promise in our learning goals.- Linda Suskie, assessment and accreditation consultantAs we all know, the ABA1 has promulgated new standards related to learning outcomes. These standards require:That a law school publish programmatic learning outcomes (i.e., competencies that all students should have upon graduation)That a law school also have course learning outcomes (i.e., competencies that all students should have upon completion of a course) for every course at the law schoolThat course learning outcomes in required courses align with professional skills, the jurisdiction’s licensing exam, or the law school’s missionThat different sections of the same required course share some set of minimum learning outcomes (although faculty are free to devise additional learning outcomes beyond this required minimum)One of the most challenging aspects for associate deans in trying to implement these new standards is lack of faculty buy-in. There is not a strong tradition of learning outcomes in legal education, despite their prevalence and acknowledged value in other sectors of higher education,2 and many faculty members see the ABA’s mandate as a bureaucratic exercise and/or an interference with academic freedom.In working with faculties on learning outcomes — both programmatic and course-level — I emphasize the concept articulated by assessment expert Linda Suskie above: that learning outcomes are a promise. They are, to me, first and foremost a promise to students. Students are pouring their time, money, and energy into their education, and they deserve a promise that, if they apply themselves, the curriculum will equip them with certain knowledge, skills, and values.3Employers also have a major stake in the competency of our graduates. I have no trouble saying that every law school in the nation wants to have a reputation with employers for producing graduates who will meet the expectations for junior attorneys.Furthermore, in legal education more so than perhaps any other field besides medicine, learning outcomes are a promise to society. Certainly, the bar exam seeks to ensure a minimum level of competency with respect to knowledge and skills as a form of consumer protection for clients. But the value added by law schools surely goes beyond training graduates to pass the bar exam. Law schools should be expected to graduate students who understand the role of lawyers in society and their obligations to their clients, and who also possess the degree of professionalism and adaptability required to successfully enter practice.Another approach I take when I work with faculties is to focus on three fundamental questions that we must address as educators:Are there certain competencies we expect our students to graduate with?How do we know if they actually possess those competencies?What should we do if they do not?The conversation around learning outcomes pushes us toward answering these fundamental questions, and the new ABA standards provide an impetus for that dialogue.If you would like to discuss these or related ideas, or talk about how I might be able to work with your school on learning outcomes and assessment, please feel free to email me at spollvogt@LSAC.org.[1] Here and in other blog posts I use “ABA” as a shorthand for the Council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admission to the Bar. [2] Indeed, most universities and regional accreditors require the articulation of learning outcomes.[3] It is virtually impossible to ensure that every student will achieve mastery in the competencies designated by our learning outcomes; the gold standard in assessment literature is attainment by 80% of students.
Основное содержимое страницы с новостью.
March 3, 2026
Learning goals are promises that we make to our students, their families, employers, and society that every student who . . . graduates with this degree can do the things we promise in our learning goals.
- Linda Suskie, assessment and accreditation consultant
As we all know, the ABA1 has promulgated new standards related to learning outcomes. These standards require:
- That a law school publish programmatic learning outcomes (i.e., competencies that all students should have upon graduation)
- That a law school also have course learning outcomes (i.e., competencies that all students should have upon completion of a course) for every course at the law school
- That course learning outcomes in required courses align with professional skills, the jurisdiction’s licensing exam, or the law school’s mission
- That different sections of the same required course share some set of minimum learning outcomes (although faculty are free to devise additional learning outcomes beyond this required minimum)
One of the most challenging aspects for associate deans in trying to implement these new standards is lack of faculty buy-in. There is not a strong tradition of learning outcomes in legal education, despite their prevalence and acknowledged value in other sectors of higher education,2 and many faculty members see the ABA’s mandate as a bureaucratic exercise and/or an interference with academic freedom.
In working with faculties on learning outcomes — both programmatic and course-level — I emphasize the concept articulated by assessment expert Linda Suskie above: that learning outcomes are a promise. They are, to me, first and foremost a promise to students. Students are pouring their time, money, and energy into their education, and they deserve a promise that, if they apply themselves, the curriculum will equip them with certain knowledge, skills, and values.3
Employers also have a major stake in the competency of our graduates. I have no trouble saying that every law school in the nation wants to have a reputation with employers for producing graduates who will meet the expectations for junior attorneys.
Furthermore, in legal education more so than perhaps any other field besides medicine, learning outcomes are a promise to society. Certainly, the bar exam seeks to ensure a minimum level of competency with respect to knowledge and skills as a form of consumer protection for clients. But the value added by law schools surely goes beyond training graduates to pass the bar exam. Law schools should be expected to graduate students who understand the role of lawyers in society and their obligations to their clients, and who also possess the degree of professionalism and adaptability required to successfully enter practice.
Another approach I take when I work with faculties is to focus on three fundamental questions that we must address as educators:
- Are there certain competencies we expect our students to graduate with?
- How do we know if they actually possess those competencies?
- What should we do if they do not?
The conversation around learning outcomes pushes us toward answering these fundamental questions, and the new ABA standards provide an impetus for that dialogue.
If you would like to discuss these or related ideas, or talk about how I might be able to work with your school on learning outcomes and assessment, please feel free to email me at spollvogt@LSAC.org.
[1] Here and in other blog posts I use “ABA” as a shorthand for the Council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admission to the Bar.
[2] Indeed, most universities and regional accreditors require the articulation of learning outcomes.
[3] It is virtually impossible to ensure that every student will achieve mastery in the competencies designated by our learning outcomes; the gold standard in assessment literature is attainment by 80% of students.
Susannah Pollvogt
Senior Advisor for Academics and Curriculum, LEC
Susannah Pollvogt is the senior advisor for academics and curriculum for LSAC’s Legal Education Consulting (LEC) group.
Схожие новости
| # | Наименование новости | Тональность | Информативность | Дата публикации |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Why It’s Important to Work Backwards from Assessment to Learning Outcomes | 0 | 10.18 | 11-08-2026 |
| 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 | The Job Market for New Law Grads Has Always Been About Supply and Demand | 0 | 8.98 | 13-08-2026 |
| 7 | A Spotlight on How Pathway Programs Strengthen the Legal Education Ecosystem | 0 | 7.7 | 23-03-2026 |
| 8 | Doing Good with Law: VIISTA As a Path for Immigration and Public Interest Lawyers | 0 | 11.1 | 26-01-2026 |
| 9 | LSAC and NALP Spotlight the Ripple Effects of Accelerated Recruiting Timelines | 0 | 12.1 | 11-06-2026 |
| 10 | The History of Big Law Recruitment Timelines | 0 | 9.64 | 11-06-2026 |
Классификация: . Схожих патентов: 0. Схожих новостей: 10. Тональность: 0. Информативность: 5.71. Источник: www.lsac.org.