U.S. Legal Education Through the Looking
Glass: Education Standards
Leo P. Martinez
Albert Abramson Professor of Law
University of California, Hastings College of the Law
European Law Faculties Association
Masaryk University
Brno, Czech Republic
20 April 2017
1
U.S. Law Schools Through the Looking
Glass: Education Standards
7 Observations: 7 Minutes
Teaching and the Legal
Academy
7 observations: 7 minutes
Legal Education in the 21st Century?
Differentiation
University’s roles
Productivity and costs
Revenue streams
The profession
Licensing
Access and justice
Teaching and the Legal Academy
Cost/Revenue
(differentiation/role of the university)
Accreditation Standards
One Observation – Cost/Revenue
Tuition: the Role of
State/University Support
Law as a Public/Private Good
ROI – Return on Investment
Tuition at US Law Schools – 2015/16
Private schools:
Columbia University Law School
Brigham Young University Law School
$62,700
$23,940
Tuition at US Law Schools – 2015/16
Private schools:
Columbia University Law School
Brigham Young University Law School
$62,700
$23,940
Public schools:
University of Virginia School of Law
University of North Dakota School of Law
$54,000
$11,161
University of California Law School
Tuition – 2015/16
Tuition for UC law schools:
Program
Berkeley Law
UC Davis
UCLA
UC Irvine
UC Hastings
$
$
$
$
$
2015-16
Tuition
48,655
47,339
45,284
44,765
44,201
2015-16
Nonresident
$
52,576
$
56,950
$
51,778
$
51,259
$
50,201
8
University of California Law School
Tuition – 2015/16
Tuition for University of
California law schools:
Tuition for selected private
institutions:
Program
Berkeley Law
UC Davis
UCLA
UC Irvine
UC Hastings
$
$
$
$
$
2015-16
Tuition
48,655
47,339
45,284
44,765
44,201
2015-16
Nonresident
$
52,576
$
56,950
$
51,778
$
51,259
$
50,201
Program
Univ. of Southern California
Fordham University
George Washington
Boston University
New York Law School
University of San Francisco
$
$
$
$
$
$
2015-16
Tuition
58,022
54,116
54,114
49,330
49,240
46,860
9
Percentage of UC Hastings Budget Funded by the State
Academic(Year(
%(Budget(Funded(
by(State(
Academic(Year(
%(Budget(Funded(
by(State(
1986-87
80%
2001-02
39%
1987-88
65%
2002-03
37%
1988-89
67%
2003-04
26%
1989-90
63%
2004-05
19%
63%
2005-06
18%
61%
2006-07
21%
1992-93
55%
2007-08
19%
1993-94
52%
2008-09
14%
1994-95
50%
2009-10
14%
1995-96
46%
2010-11
12%
1996-97
41%
2011-12
10%
1997-98
38%
2012-13
10%
1998-99
40%
2013-14
12%
1999-00
42%
2014-15
13%
2000-01
40%
2015-16
15%
1990-91
1991-92
1.
2.
Data are estimates; fund source dollars are in thousands.
UC Hastings budget is enterprise-wide.
UC HASTINGS : THE NEXT 100 YEARS
10
Percentage of UC Hastings Budget Funded by the State
80%#
70%#
60%#
50%#
40%#
30%#
20%#
10%#
0%#
*UC Hastings budget is enterprise-wide.
UC HASTINGS : THE NEXT 100 YEARS
11
Education as Public good v. Private good
US Higher Education is
Student-Funded
ROI as a metric
Debate is nonexistent
• The role of loans
• The US as lender
• Education is commoditized
• Education is devalued
• Money not public policy
dominates
• Education is not cheap
12
Teaching and the Legal Academy
Cost/Revenue
(differentiation/role of the university)
Accreditation Standards
ABA Standard 401. [Faculty] QUALIFICATIONS
A law school shall have a faculty whose qualifications
and experience enable the law school to operate in
compliance with the Standards and carry out its
program of legal education.
ABA Standard 401. [Faculty] QUALIFICATIONS
A law school shall have a faculty whose qualifications
and experience enable the law school to operate in
compliance with the Standards and carry out its
program of legal education. The faculty shall possess a
high degree of competence, as demonstrated by
academic qualification, experience in teaching or
practice, teaching effectiveness, and scholarship.
ABA Standard 315. EVALUATION OF PROGRAM OF
LEGAL EDUCATION, LEARNING OUTCOMES, AND
ASSESSMENT METHODS
The dean and the faculty of a law school shall conduct
ongoing evaluation of the law school’s program of
legal education, learning outcomes, and assessment
methods; and shall use the results of this evaluation
to determine the degree of student attainment of
competency in the learning outcomes and to make
appropriate changes to improve the curriculum.
ABA Standard 404. RESPONSIBILITIES OF FULL-TIME
FACULTY
(a) A law school shall adopt, . . . written policies with
respect to full-time faculty members’ responsibilities.
The policies shall require that the full-time faculty, . . . :
(1) Teaching, preparing for classes, being available
for student consultation . . . , assessing student
performance . . . , and remaining current in the
subjects being taught;
(2) Participating in academic advising, ;
(3) Engaging in scholarship . . . .
AALS Bylaws Section 6-4. Faculty.
a. A member school shall attract and maintain a
faculty of high competence . . . .
AALS Bylaws Section 6-4. Faculty.
c. . . . . Competence shall be determined in the
aggregate, with emphasis upon the following
criteria:
(i) Quality of teaching . . .;
(ii) Faculty training and experience;
(iii) Scholarly interests and performance; and
(iv) . . . participation in [faculty governance].
What’s Missing?
The Metrics of Teaching Ability
A Focus on Cost
Balance between Cost and
Quality
ABA Standard 403. INSTRUCTIONAL ROLE OF FACULTY
(a) The full-time faculty shall teach substantially all of
the first one-third of each student’s coursework. The
full-time faculty shall also teach during the academic
year either (1) more than half of all of the credit hours
actually offered by the law school, or (2) two-thirds of
the student contact hours generated by student
enrollment at the law school.
(b) A law school shall ensure effective teaching by all
persons providing instruction to its students.
Proposed ABA Standard 403. INSTRUCTIONAL ROLE
OF FACULTY
(a) The full-time faculty shall teach substantially all of
the first one-third of each student’s coursework.
(b) A law school shall ensure effective teaching by all
persons providing instruction to its students.
U.S. Legal Education Through the Looking
Glass: Education Standards
Leo P. Martinez
Albert Abramson Professor of Law
University of California, Hastings College of the Law
European Law Faculties Association
Masaryk University
Brno, Czech Republic
20 April 2017
24