Should the ABA require a curve for all law schools? Forum

[clintonius]

The academic integrity issues definitely seem more pronounced the higher you go. Harvard, Yale, Berkeley, Chicago and Stanford are not going to lead the way on this one. This is why ABA action is necessary. This pattern is very similar to what is going on in the business school world.

Blatant Berkeley and anti-CLS trolling.

[Mr. Matlock]

Take 2 schools of approximate equal rank.... say ND and BC. I have no idea if the curve is equivalent, but for the sake of the argument, let's say ND has a higher/easier curve. Am I to believe that if an employer is looking at 2 students from these schools, of equal rank, top 10%, the kid with the higher GPA wins out? No one here believes that employers realize the current inequality of the grading systems? Or does this have nothing to do with employment and everything to do with USNews rankings?

[D-hops]

Not until September, but it's got a ridiculous curve.

How does it stack up against the new GULC curve

http://www.georgetownsba.com/2009/12/ne ... curve.html

Pretty well:

http://www.law.northwestern.edu/academi ... olicy.html

[macattaq]

The ABA doesn't give a fuuuuuuuuuuuuu. If it did, we wouldn't have more than 100 law schools total (or thereabout), and new ones wouldn't be opening up all over the country. Entry to the profession would be regulated more like dentistry, so that there wouldn't be a glut of attorneys on the market. The ABA would also eliminate this horseshit rankings game, and strongly suggest that schools not participate in that garbage. Each of these things would go just as far towards making the profession more robust, and prevent a lot of the problems we are seeing, perhaps moreso than preventing grade inflation.

[Danteshek]

The academic integrity issues definitely seem more pronounced the higher you go. Harvard, Yale, Berkeley, Chicago and Stanford are not going to lead the way on this one. This is why ABA action is necessary. This pattern is very similar to what is going on in the business school world.

What academic integrity issues?

If anything, the schools you named are leading the way, away from a traditional grades-based system altogether. Honors/Pass/Low Pass type systems might replace GPAs at more schools.

Alternative grading systems (and no ranking policies) are deliberate attempts to make schools less competitive. Less competition generally means people work less hard and accomplish less academically. In other words, top law schools are becoming less academic and more like business schools. This is a clear moral hazard. The argument that such policies make for a more collegial environment is a poor excuse for a degradation in academic standards.

[d34d9823]

The ABA doesn't give a fuuuuuuuuuuuuu. If it did, we wouldn't have more than 100 law schools total (or thereabout), and new ones wouldn't be opening up all over the country. Entry to the profession would be regulated more like dentistry, so that there wouldn't be a glut of attorneys on the market. The ABA would also eliminate this horseshit rankings game, and strongly suggest that schools not participate in that garbage. Each of these things would go just as far towards making the profession more robust, and prevent a lot of the problems we are seeing, perhaps moreso than preventing grade inflation.

What problems are we seeing? If people are making poor career choices of their own free will, that's not a problem, it's the free market at work.

[crossingforHYS]

sorry double post

[crossingforHYS]

Bretton Woods anyone....one country raises tarrifs and the others follow. When will the law schools learn?

[d34d9823]

Bretton Woods anyone....one country raises tarrifs and the others follow. When will the law schools learn?

It's all a shell game anyway, as class rank is what matters and any employer can generate that from the bids they receive.

The real object here is to keep up the pretense that their prestige is up there with HYS.

[nealric]

Wouldn't work. 4th tier schools need to fail out some percentage of their class for bar passage reasons. No way you are going to get T14's to do the same when they don't have to.

[09042014]

Wouldn't work. 4th tier schools need to fail out some percentage of their class for bar passage reasons. No way you are going to get T14's to do the same when they don't have to.

Great point.

[crossingforHYS]

Bretton Woods anyone....one country raises tarrifs and the others follow. When will the law schools learn?

It's all a shell game anyway, as class rank is what matters and any employer can generate that from the bids they receive.

The real object here is to keep up the pretense that their prestige is up there with HYS.

hmmm good point, didn't think of that

[Bildungsroman]

Class rank is a much better assessment tool than curved GPA anyway. If all law schools did away with traditional grades and just gave people ranks in the class instead, then grade inflation would no longer be a problem. Employers would see how applicants performed compared to their peers at the same school, which would make evaluating candidates a lot more effective, and comparisons across peer schools would be easier as well.

Edit: Also, unlike a lot of people on this board, I think the ABA should minimize its role in controlling law schools. I don't want the ABA to exert monopoly power to restrict new schools from opening, and I don't want the ABA to stifle innovation in grading/ranking procedures.

Also, I should point out that petitions are almost uniformly worthless.

[d34d9823]

Class rank is a much better assessment tool than curved GPA anyway. If all law schools did away with traditional grades and just gave people ranks in the class instead, then grade inflation would no longer be a problem. Employers would see how applicants performed compared to their peers at the same school, which would make evaluating candidates a lot more effective, and comparisons across peer schools would be easier as well.

Edit: Also, unlike a lot of people on this board, I think the ABA should minimize its role in controlling law schools. I don't want the ABA to exert monopoly power to restrict new schools from opening, and I don't want the ABA to stifle innovation in grading/ranking procedures.

Also, I should point out that petitions are almost uniformly worthless.

I like the free market argument, but someone pointed out to me that it's skewed if you fail to consider that lending is subsidized. The argument that the market should be consistent with regard to regulation seems strong to me.

[Danteshek]

Wouldn't work. 4th tier schools need to fail out some percentage of their class for bar passage reasons. No way you are going to get T14's to do the same when they don't have to.

Great point.

Not really. T4 schools could still fail people out who have a 2.7 or lower.

[Billy Blanks]

Alternative grading systems (and no ranking policies) are deliberate attempts to make schools less competitive. Less competition generally means people work less hard and accomplish less academically. In other words, top law schools are becoming less academic and more like business schools. This is a clear moral hazard. The argument that such policies make for a more collegial environment is a poor excuse for a degradation in academic standards.

I'm still confused about the purpose of creating a standardized curve. Is it for employers? Why are we tryng to make things easier for employers? So it's more fair? So students at better school without curves (or with strange curve) are judged more harshly in relation to students at lower schools with strict curves?

Or is standardization necessary so those lazy students at HYSCB don't continue to "accomplish less academically." Also, why does "accomplishing less academically" (which has not been shown to be a problem at HYSCB, I should remind you) constitute an "academic integrity issue"? Academic integrity would only come into play if students at these schools begin receiving the same grades for less work/performance (or better grades for the same level of work/performance). Why? Beacuse it's misleading for a school to say a student has earned a B+ when this used to signify a certain level of performance relative to that student's peers and now it signifies a different level of performance relative to that student's peers. However, it is not misleading, dishonest or in any way destroying the "integrity" of academic signifiers to say that a majority of students "passed" a class.

[d34d9823]

Alternative grading systems (and no ranking policies) are deliberate attempts to make schools less competitive. Less competition generally means people work less hard and accomplish less academically. In other words, top law schools are becoming less academic and more like business schools. This is a clear moral hazard. The argument that such policies make for a more collegial environment is a poor excuse for a degradation in academic standards.

I'm still confused about the purpose of creating a standardized curve. Is it for employers? Why are we tryng to make things easier for employers? So it's more fair? So students at better school without curves (or with strange curve) are judged more harshly in relation to students at lower schools with strict curves?

Or is standardization necessary so those lazy students at HYSCB don't continue to "accomplish less academically." Also, why does "accomplishing less academically" (which has not been shown to be a problem at HYSCB, I should remind you) constitute an "academic integrity issue"? Academic integrity would only come into play if students at these schools begin receiving the same grades for less work/performance (or better grades for the same level of work/performance). Why? Beacuse it's misleading for a school to say a student has earned a B+ when this used to signify a certain level of performance relative to that student's peers and now it signifies a different level of performance relative to that student's peers. However, it is not misleading, dishonest or in any way destroying the "integrity" of academic signifiers to say that a majority of students "passed" a class.

I think you've nailed it here. TTT envy is the only motivation I can see for this.

[capitalacq]

Alternative grading systems (and no ranking policies) are deliberate attempts to make schools less competitive. Less competition generally means people work less hard and accomplish less academically. In other words, top law schools are becoming less academic and more like business schools. This is a clear moral hazard. The argument that such policies make for a more collegial environment is a poor excuse for a degradation in academic standards.

I'm still confused about the purpose of creating a standardized curve. Is it for employers? Why are we tryng to make things easier for employers? So it's more fair? So students at better school without curves (or with strange curve) are judged more harshly in relation to students at lower schools with strict curves?

Or is standardization necessary so those lazy students at HYSCB don't continue to "accomplish less academically." Also, why does "accomplishing less academically" (which has not been shown to be a problem at HYSCB, I should remind you) constitute an "academic integrity issue"? Academic integrity would only come into play if students at these schools begin receiving the same grades for less work/performance (or better grades for the same level of work/performance). Why? Beacuse it's misleading for a school to say a student has earned a B+ when this used to signify a certain level of performance relative to that student's peers and now it signifies a different level of performance relative to that student's peers. However, it is not misleading, dishonest or in any way destroying the "integrity" of academic signifiers to say that a majority of students "passed" a class.

I think you've nailed it here. TTT envy is the only motivation I can see for this.

yeah. i imagine OP is doing well at a TTT but blaming his lack of job offers on the ABA and other schools rather than realizing he's the one who chose that TTT.

[capitalacq]

Take 2 schools of approximate equal rank.... say ND and BC. I have no idea if the curve is equivalent, but for the sake of the argument, let's say ND has a higher/easier curve. Am I to believe that if an employer is looking at 2 students from these schools, of equal rank, top 10%, the kid with the higher GPA wins out? No one here believes that employers realize the current inequality of the grading systems? Or does this have nothing to do with employment and everything to do with USNews rankings?

I believe employers care about who they hire and want the best they can get

[vamedic03]

Class rank is a much better assessment tool than curved GPA anyway. If all law schools did away with traditional grades and just gave people ranks in the class instead, then grade inflation would no longer be a problem. Employers would see how applicants performed compared to their peers at the same school, which would make evaluating candidates a lot more effective, and comparisons across peer schools would be easier as well.

This is impossible - the entire point of curved grades is to provide a rough ranking. Its not possible for a professor to rank 100 exams. It is possible for the professor to differentiate the exams into rough bands of quality. These rough bands of quality then are assigned a grade based on the curve. You need class grades to develop a class rank!!!

[Danteshek]

Alternative grading systems (and no ranking policies) are deliberate attempts to make schools less competitive. Less competition generally means people work less hard and accomplish less academically. In other words, top law schools are becoming less academic and more like business schools. This is a clear moral hazard. The argument that such policies make for a more collegial environment is a poor excuse for a degradation in academic standards.

I'm still confused about the purpose of creating a standardized curve. Is it for employers? Why are we tryng to make things easier for employers? So it's more fair? So students at better school without curves (or with strange curve) are judged more harshly in relation to students at lower schools with strict curves?

Or is standardization necessary so those lazy students at HYSCB don't continue to "accomplish less academically." Also, why does "accomplishing less academically" (which has not been shown to be a problem at HYSCB, I should remind you) constitute an "academic integrity issue"? Academic integrity would only come into play if students at these schools begin receiving the same grades for less work/performance (or better grades for the same level of work/performance). Why? Beacuse it's misleading for a school to say a student has earned a B+ when this used to signify a certain level of performance relative to that student's peers and now it signifies a different level of performance relative to that student's peers. However, it is not misleading, dishonest or in any way destroying the "integrity" of academic signifiers to say that a majority of students "passed" a class.

I think you've nailed it here. TTT envy is the only motivation I can see for this.

yeah. i imagine OP is doing well at a TTT but blaming his lack of job offers on the ABA and other schools rather than realizing he's the one who chose that TTT.

I am doing well at a CA TTT (just finished 1L). I am also working in Washington DC this summer for the Securities and Exchange Commission. In the fall, I will be working for a federal magistrate judge. I don't think I'll be blaming anyone anytime soon.

I think a more uniform grading system would benefit law students in general.

[wiseowl]

Class rank is a much better assessment tool than curved GPA anyway. If all law schools did away with traditional grades and just gave people ranks in the class instead, then grade inflation would no longer be a problem. Employers would see how applicants performed compared to their peers at the same school, which would make evaluating candidates a lot more effective, and comparisons across peer schools would be easier as well.

This is impossible - the entire point of curved grades is to provide a rough ranking. Its not possible for a professor to rank 100 exams. It is possible for the professor to differentiate the exams into rough bands of quality. These rough bands of quality then are assigned a grade based on the curve. You need class grades to develop a class rank!!!

the only way to do what he wanted would be completely objective exams, i.e. multiple choice in every exam for every class.

now THAT would be TTT.