Law Community Benefits From ABA Accreditation Process
Clifford's Notes, Chicago Lawyer, 10/01/2007By Robert A. Clifford
The American Bar Association has long been part of the accreditation process of law schools. In fact, one of its first committees was on legal education and admissions to the bar. Today, that still stands as one of its principal missions.
The ABA accreditation function is performed by its Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar. In compliance with the rules of the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) on accrediting bodies, this section sets standards independently from the normal decision-making bodies of the ABA.
The DOE recently extended the ABA’s accreditation authority for 18 months, which is shorter than the term of authority normally granted. In doing so, it cited several substantive and procedural issues, the substantive issues being diversity and appropriate bar passage rates for law schools.
I can assure you, knowing many of the people on this committee and throughout the ABA, that they are volunteering their time to make the profession better. Diversity has always been and continues to be one of its core values. I am certain that all groups involved will see these greater goals met after they have had a few more months to study the committee’s work.
But the issues the committee is trying to address are part of a greater problem throughout this country. For years Illinois had an extremely high bar passage rate. It would not be unusual for 95 percent of all law students to receive a passing grade. Many of them would laugh, with their letter in hand, that they learned some of the courses in an hour or so at a bar review class, and that minimal knowledge was sufficient to pass the exam.
California, on the other hand, is notorious for a low bar-passage rate. In fact, many would-be lawyers are discouraged from taking the exam for fear of the preparation time involved with little guarantee of passing, particularly if they attended out-of-state law schools. I think that is great. Since when should going to law school for three or four years ensure automatic passage? But the problem is greater than that.
Jay Leno has a funny bit from time to time where he interviews random people on the street about the simplest of questions: Who is the vice president of the United States? Who is the chief justice of the Supreme Court of the United States? How many United States senators are there?
As people stumble for an answer, looking puzzled, perplexed and embarrassed, it’s funny, but after I begin to reflect, it really isn’t that funny at all. It’s not just a question of intelligence, it is more a function of the failure of the schools in not teaching civics, government, and consumer information. Many students go on to law school without knowing even the basics about the three branches of government.
Although we may be graduating more law students, are they smarter? They are more energetic, but they demand more personal time. They may be more street-smart, but they are less book-smart, often preferring the unreliable Internet. They may be more decisive, but I question the values and bases on which they make their decisions.
My oldest daughter is a high school teacher in the Chicago public school system, and I have a real appreciation for what she goes through on a daily basis in preparing these youngsters, seeing them now in their teens after years of education. She really can make no assumptions as to what they know, and sometimes it’s like starting from scratch. It is on her shoulders to teach tomorrow’s talented business executives, intelligent physicians, moral public servants, and creative engineers. We also need honest, enlightened lawyers.
The American Bar Association is examining its process of accrediting law schools to try to do just that. It is interested in graduating quality, not quantity.
I look back on the findings of the 1959 ABA Special Committee on Economics of Law Practice, which found, “In the face of the country’s ever growing need for lawyers, the law is becoming a dwindling profession.”
Imagine that: not enough men and women applying to law school.
It is reported there were nearly 150,000 students in law schools throughout the United States in 2005. The Bureau of Labor Statistics for 2006-07 estimates there are 735,000 practicing lawyers, the greatest number per capita in the world. Although there is a lot of legal work to do, I don’t sense the profession “dwindling.”
But we must examine what these people are learning. A legal education is no longer an apprenticeship, as it was until the end of the 19th century, although there is much to be said for mentoring. Today, it is imperative that classroom learning is just as important.
I don’t believe in the maxim, “You’re never going to use that in real life,” as I heard so many fellow students say as I studied calculus, Spanish, and European history.
Classroom learning expands your mind in many different ways, whether or not you make it as a contestant on “Jeopardy.” (It should be noted that the ABA House of Delegates at is Annual Meeting in August called for the adoption of legislation that would ensure that all students experience high-quality civics learning.”
As for the ABA proposal, its petition for renewal of its accreditation powers is due June 2008. Without approval, it is possible that accreditation would be splintered, determined on a regional basis by various agencies in various states. Although the qualifications to practice law are determined by the highest courts and legislatures of each state, a national accrediting agency like the ABA can provide consistency and a comparison of education programs throughout the country.
The ABA is sensitive to input from the judiciary, the practicing bar, the academic community, and the non-lawyer public. We need the ABA to try to assure that lawyers are well-educated, but the schools leading up to that point need to do so as well.
