New ABA Standard 314 requires laws schools to use formative assessments a fancy phrase for a simple concept: giving students feedback on how they are progressing in a course. Anyone who has seen the data knows that formative assessment helps student learning. Most schools of higher education have used formative assessments for years. Law teaching is a latecomer to this process.
As an Associate Dean of Academic Affairs, I have the role in our school of helping to promote formative assessment in our classes. I have used formative assessment for several years. However, I wanted to develop a method that was effective but not overly time-consuming. I think that most law professors, if they care about their students, will try out a method if it does not overload them.
I pondered the area of civil procedure that I find consistently less impressive results on final exams than I would expect. The area of removal came to mind. The requirements for removal are spelled out in the removal statutes. Yet the requirements are manyand picky too. If the defendant removing a case does not cross her ts and dot her Is, she faces remand for a seemingly minor omission.
So, here was the exercise. I wrote a letter to the students, as a client from a state other than the one in which they were lawyers. I told the lawyers that I was a nonresident and wanted to know whether my case could be taken from state court where it was filed to federal court. I also said that I liked to know each step in the process and so wanted them to explain those steps and all deadlines.
Students received this letter the day we finished removal and had a week to prepare a response letter. I developed a checklist of the removal requirements and had my Teaching Assistant (TA) take a first run through, checking the steps that had been accurately described and putting an X next to those that were not described. The form ended with two categories: This case is vulnerable to a motion to remand [with a blank after that] and This case is safe from a motion to remand [again, with a blank line after].
I then checked the TAs marks against each lettera process that took about an hour and a half for almost 70 students. More than half missed something in the removal requirements such that I could mark the box that said the case was vulnerable to remand. The most teling point for most students was my marking the box that showed their case was vulnerable to a remand because they had not read the statute carefully and followed through diligently.
This feedback seemed to help. Many students made appointments to revisit removal and see how they had missed a requirement. The final exam results showed the strongest command of removal I have seen in 13 years of teaching this subject.
I already knew that providing feedback to students helped learning. What I had not established before is that the formative assessment can be done effectively without a great deal of time and effort. Using a TA helped with that, sure. Her work helped me to go more quickly through the letters and spot omissions.
I will now offer this formative assessment as an example for my colleagues. Ill encourage my colleagues to consider ways in which they can develop similar ways to provide students feedback. The adoption of Standard 314 mandates such teaching, but the truth is law school ought to have been doing this already. Now, I can advocate for providing students feedback and credibly say it does not have to take excessive time. Not wanting to use the youd better comply with Standard 314 card, I hope that the example will encourage professors to explore formative assessment. Once they see the benefits, my hope is that the benefits of the process will sell itself. Of course, for the recalcitrant, theres always the reminder of an ABA site visit.
Print & Share:Like this:
Filed under: Uncategorized