AccessLex Resource Collections (AccessLex Institute)
Not a member yet
537 research outputs found
Sort by
Legal Education Data Deck
No full texthttps://arc.accesslex.org/featured_publications/1024/thumbnail.jp
Predicting Bar Success: The Mediating Effects of Law School GPA
No full texthttps://arc.accesslex.org/featured_publications/1025/thumbnail.jp
What About Us? How Law Schools Can Help Historically Underrepresented Law Students Develop Their Professional Identities
No full textThe revised ABA Standards require law schools to provide substantial opportunities for law students to develop their professional identity. An individual’s professional identity as a lawyer consists of one’s personal identities integrated into who they are as a professional. Gaining a professional identity means going from an outsider to an insider in that profession, and a law student’s professional identity formation refers to the process of evolving from law student to lawyer. Law schools must dive into the murky waters of race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation because that is where our historically underrepresented law students are, trying to become professionals in a system that sees them as the other, different, and outsiders.Part I of the Article briefly defines professional identity. Part II sets forth an overview of the many obstacles historically underrepresented law students face—including, but not limited to, the historical exclusion of underrepresented individuals from law school and the legal profession, imposter syndrome, bias, microaggressions, wealth and education disparities—in developing their professional identity. Part III provides a summary of tangible solutions that law schools may employ to address those obstacles and help those law students develop their professional identity. This Article concludes that it is critical for law schools to intervene to ensure historically underrepresented law students can properly develop their professional identity
Predicting Bar Success: The Mediating Effects of Law School GPA
Full text linkMost American law schools evaluate candidates for admission based on final undergraduate GPA (UGPA) and Law School Admission Test (LSAT) scores, due in part to accreditation requirements and institutional bar passage goals. However, a host of studies have demonstrated racial and ethnic score disparities associated with the LSAT, and prior literature suggests that admissions metrics have limited utility for predicting bar passage—especially when accounting for academic performance in law school. This study uses data from nearly 20,000 lawyers who graduated from 39 law schools to build on previous literature. We propose statistical mediation to achieve a more accurate understanding of the relationship between, and predictive value, of law school admission factors, 1L LGPA, and first-time bar passage. We find that (1) statistical mediation is preferable to moderation, revealing that (2) 1L LGPA mediates, or accounts for, 81 percent and 73 percent of the predictive effects of final UGPA and LSAT, respectively, on first-time bar passage. Therefore, using LSAT score and UGPA to predict bar passage underemphasizes the role that law schools play in preparing their students for the bar exam and a legal career
Occupational Licensing and Labor Market Mobility: Evidence from the Legal Profession
No full textWe study how state occupational licensing requirements shape labor mobility across U.S. legal markets. Drawing on newly collected data, we link variation in state bar exam waiver policies to lawyers’ license acquisitions, professional disciplinary records, and educational histories. We find that bar exam waivers increase the number of experienced lawyers obtaining a new license by 38 percent, but that the additional lawyers are subject to more professional discipline and tend to have graduated from less selective law schools. Our results suggest that state-level occupational licensing regimes can create a trade-off between the supply and quality of professionals in an industry
Student Debt, COVID-19 Relief, and Loan Forgiveness: Perspectives from Today’s Young Lawyers
No full texthttps://arc.accesslex.org/featured_publications/1027/thumbnail.jp
Comprehensive Guide to Bar Admission Requirements
No full textThis source provides information on bar admission requirements, including legal education, character and fitness, and bar exam requirements, in all US jurisdictions
Measuring \u27Up\u27: The Promise of Undergraduate GPA Growth in Law School Admissions
Full text linkLaw School Admissions Test (LSAT) scores and final undergraduate GPA (UGPA) factor heavily in admission decisions at most law schools. However, these metrics overlook other characteristics that might also correlate with law school success—such as a growth mindset— and tend to exacerbate existing racial disparities in educational attainment. Using a sample of 5,599 recent law school students from 14 law schools, we compare the predictive power of UGPA growth (the difference between students’ final and first-year UGPA) to that of final UGPA and LSAT scores in law school admissions. We find that UGPA growth is positively associated with first-year law school GPA (1L LGPA) and negatively associated with the likelihood of first-year (1L) non-transfer attrition. Furthermore, our findings indicate that contrary to LSAT score and final UGPA, UGPA growth values do not substantively vary by race/ethnicity. Our conclusion is that UGPA growth might be a valid metric to consider as institutions across the nation examine how to recruit diverse cohorts without the ability to consider race
Fostering First-Generation Student Success in Law School
No full textThis Article addresses how law schools can better support first-generation (“first-gen”) students, typically defined as those for whom neither parent has a bachelor’s degree. We survey first-gen programming in U.S. law schools, the broad goal of which is to retain students and help them to thrive, thereby increasing their educational and career achievement. We link this goal to extensive research on the growing challenge of upward mobility. In addition, we synthesize the vast empirical research about first-gen students, most of it about undergraduates, with a view to identifying beneficial interventions. We also summarize what quantitative data, collected by the Law School Survey of Student Engagement (LSSSE) and the National Association of Law Placement (NALP), reveal about the first-gen student population.
The first-gen project has been made more salient by the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling in Students for Fair Admissions vs. Harvard, which held unconstitutional the use of race as a basis for affirmative action in higher education admissions. The first-gen category provides an alternative basis for assisting many students of color, while also supporting socioeconomically disadvantaged white students. Indeed, these programs may foster cross-racial collaboration and coalition building as students from a wide range of races and ethnicities gain an appreciation for the shared struggle for upward mobility they face. Importantly, these students may carry an orientation to see common ground beyond the educational setting and into the wider world, thus helping bridge the growing cultural and ideological divides polarizing our nation.
Lastly, we offer insights from a seminar Pruitt teaches at UC Davis. The course, created for first-gen students, draws on scholarly literature, memoir, and fiction to explore the first-gen experience. The seminar is an invitation for students to tell their own first-gen stories, drawing on those narratives as sources of empowerment. We reveal some of the challenges, pitfalls, and successes of this course, and we discuss other curricular offerings that could foster a sense of belonging—and success—for first-gen law students. Ultimately, we call for more empirical research into the experiences of first-gen students in U.S. law schools
Does the 1L Curriculum Make a Difference?
No full textGeorgetown Law’s Curriculum B (also known as Section 3) offers a unique opportunity to study an alternative 1L curriculum. The standard 1L curriculum has been around for decades and is still offered at the vast majority of U.S. law schools. Leaders in the legal academy often talk about experimenting with the 1L curriculum, but hardly anyone does it. Georgetown Law has. We study whether Georgetown’s Curriculum B yields measurable differences in student outcomes. Our empirical design leverages the fact that enrollment in Curriculum B is done by lottery when it is oversubscribed—meaning our study is effectively a randomized controlled trial. We measure treatment effects of Curriculum B by comparing outcomes of students who received the treatment (Curriculum B) with outcomes of students who received the placebo (Curriculum A) but wanted the treatment. Because students in both the treatment and control groups elected to enroll in Curriculum B, our empirical design overcomes the issue of selection bias. We find that taking Curriculum B decreases students’ performance in two business law electives (Corporations and Securities Regulation) and reduces the rate at which they graduate with Latin honors. In addition, we find that it increases students’ propensity to take certain public law electives and decreases their propensity to take certain business law electives. We further find that taking Curriculum B decreases students’ likelihood of working in the private sector (law firm or business/industry), increases their likelihood of working in the public sector (government or public interest) or doing a judicial clerkship, and reduces their average annual salary. At the same, however, we find no statistically significant effects on other outcomes, including students’ cumulative GPA, their chances of passing the bar exam or being employed 10 months after graduation, or their rate or amount of alumni giving