ABA Accreditation Standards: Process

and Substance

Thanks to Suzanne Rowe of Oregon LawFor this PowerPoint

ABA Task Force (legal writing) Brad Clary, Mel Weresh, Mary Beth Beazley,

Anthony Niedwiecki, Teri McMurtry-Chubb, Lyn Entrikin, Mary-Beth Moylan, Kim Chanbonpin

  Advisors: Mary Algero, Richard Neumann,

Craig Smith

ABA Standards Govern the accreditation of law schools

Chapter 1: General Purposes and Procedures Chapter 2: Organization and Administration Chapter 3: Program of Legal Education Chapter 4: Faculty Chapter 5: Admissions Chapter 6: Library and Information Resources Chapter 7: Facilities Chapter 8: Council Authority, Variances, and

Amendments

OrganizationAmerican Bar Association

|

Section of Legal Education

and Admissions to the Bar

|

Council (and Consultant/Staff)

|

Committees

OrganizationCouncil

|

Consultant and Staff

|

Committees

|

Accreditation Standards Communication

Review Skills*

Council Meetings Four times per year Executive Session

Just the Council: accreditation issues at particular schools

Open Session Council and affiliated representatives: revision of

standards

Affiliated Organizations ALWD CLEA ALDA SALT AALS NCBE LSAC And more…

Promulgating and Revising the Standards

SRC initially drafts new standards and revises current standards

SRC conducts hearings Council approves these drafts for “notice

and comment” and votes on final standards

A new round of examination began in 2008

Accreditation Policy Task Force 2006-07: Take a “fresh look at accreditation

from a policy perspective”

Key Task Force Conclusions Standards should be minimum. Standards should focus on outcome

measures. Accreditation process should be more

transparent.

(Unable to reach consensus on security of position.)

Major Players (currently) Barry Currier– Consultant Scott Norberg– Deputy Consultant

Hon. Solomon Oliver, Jr.– Council Chair Kent Syverud –Immediate-Past Council Chair Joan Howland– Council Chair-Elect

Jim Lewis– SRC Chair

Strategies and Coordination:

Role of “Affiliates” Not in the Section’s by-laws; discretionary “foster … understanding and cooperation

on issues of mutual interest” (2006 Strategic Plan)

Communication Diplomacy

How the Legal Writing Community Participates

Preparing “briefs” focusing on standards relevant to legal writing

Attending SRC meetings Testifying at public comments hearings Writing letters to the SRC and the Council Sending liaisons to Council meetings Serving on accreditation site teams

Issues Outcomes and program of legal education

Rigorous writing requirement

Diversity LRW predominately women; lowest protections

Security of position and governance

Current StandardStandard 405. PROFESSIONAL ENVIRONMENT

(a) A law school shall establish and maintain conditions adequate to attract and retain a competent faculty.

(b) A law school shall have an established and announced policy with respect to academic freedom and tenure of which Appendix 1 herein is an example but is not obligatory.

(c) A law school shall afford to full-time clinical faculty members a form of security of position reasonably similar to tenure, and non-compensatory perquisites reasonably similar to those provided other full-time faculty members. A law school may require these faculty members to meet standards and obligations reasonably similar to those required of other full-time faculty members. However, this Standard does not preclude a limited number of fixed, short-term appointments in a clinical program predominantly staffed by full-time

faculty members, or in an experimental program of limited duration.

(d) A law school shall afford legal writing teachers such security of position and other rights and privileges of faculty membership as may be necessary to (1) attract and retain a faculty that is well qualified to provide legal writing instruction as required by Standard 302(a)(3), and (2) safeguard academic freedom.

Proposed Alternatives Standard 405 Maintain status quo, but make it clearer that it includes tenure for

doctrinal profs Current version includes governance rights for LRW

Presumptively renewable contracts for all Equality across the school No status of position; protect academic freedom and governance

rights for all

Image Source - NetworkWorld.com

ALWD’s primary position points:

ALWD supports equal rights for law faculty as to –

Governance

Academic Freedom

Security of Position

ALWD supports increased emphasis on –

Outcomes Assessment

Multiple Assessment

Ethics and Professionalism

ALWD supports curricular reform, in particular increased emphasis on lawyering skills

For updates:

Go to SRC’s Comprehensive Review Website:http://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_education/committees/standards_review/meeting_drafts.html

2013-14 Standards Review Committee Meeting Schedule

 July 12-13, 2013 Chicago, Illinois

October 11-12, 2013 Atlanta, Georgia

February 7-8, 2014 Chicago, Illinois

April 25-26, 2014 St. Louis, Missouri

July 11-12, 2014 Denver, Colorado (tentative)

Next Meeting of Council

August 9, 2013Hotel Nikko

Nikko Ballroom, 3rd floorSan Francisco, California

 

Task Force on Legal Education To make broad recommendations on

dealing with crisis in legal education Currently working on a draft of

recommendations Approve a draft by July for comment at the

ABA annual meeting Present to ABA in December

Major Themes Need to reduce cost of legal education More flexibility for schools Foster innovation and remove accreditation

impediments to change Should take focus off of scholarship and

onto teaching Make third year more practice-oriented