The article is a bit old, but due to the fact that it’s time for law school exams once again, I thought it was on point.

It turns out that law school exams are demonstrably arbitrary and discriminatory in their grades.

In “Law School Examinations,” University of Kansas Law Prof. Philip Kissam explains that, “Most law schools have developed exam systems that generate highly disaggregated class rankings” to assist corporate law firms in choosing their prospective employees. This allows students to perceive meritocractic distribution in post-graduate options that in reality only reflects systemic discrimination.

Discrimination in higher education and professional programs? The horror, how could this have ever happened?

The overwhelming empirical evidence of discriminatory results in grading suggests the existence of serious flaws in exams, particularly issue-spotting exams. In their article on grade normalization, Downs & Levit observe: “A vast amount of research in educational testing theory suggests that the preferred method of testing in law schools is one least recommended by professional educators. A single examination followed by a course grade prevents professors from giving students repeated feedback, which many theorists say is essential to deep learning. A one-shot examination highlights inaccuracies in evaluation that may result from student illness or personal troubles, or imbalances between student coverage and selective testing.”

I know that the administration at Louisville at least pays lip service (and some demonstration of) concern over student’s personal troubles and how it effects them. But the testing and grading methods used just goes to validate that law school is not about learning the law.

The studies primarily focused on Harvard’s own grading system, but many of the problems discussed overlap with other schools systems.

(via Lawschool.com)