•  
  •  
 

Abstract

In 1994, the JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION published a survey of grading practices at law schools across the United States. That survey revealed a mix of grading approaches for clinical programs. 31 percent of all clinical courses used a fully-graded model; 33 percent graded students on a pass/fail basis; and 16 percent utilized both graded and pass/fail models. The article did not attempt to evaluate qualitatively the effectiveness of the various grading models. At about the same time that this article was published, clinicians teaching in Columbus Community Legal Services (CCLS) of The Catholic University of America were reconsidering the grading model then in use. Historically, all clinical courses at Catholic University had been graded on a pass/fail basis even though students are evaluated on the basis of number grades in nearly all other courses in the law school. Satisfaction with the pass/fail system varied from clinician to clinician. Some members of the clinical faculty reasoned that a switch to number grades would place clinical courses on par with all other law school courses and would send the message to students that the skills and values developed in clinic are as valuable as those acquired in other courses. Students might be motivated to devote more time and energy to clinic knowing that they would receive academic rewards for their efforts and performance. Other clinicians feared that the focus on grades could work to the detriment of clients. Students might be motivated to work hard in order to attain a good grade rather than to fulfill their professional obligations to their clients. The implementation of grades might lead to tensions among students and could adversely affect the student/supervisor relationship. The use of grades might also inhibit some students from taking a clinic if the safety net of pass/fail were no longer available. The clinical faculty decided to undertake a limited empirical study to test these hypotheses. This experiment took place in the spring semester of 1995. This article describes the structure and findings of the Catholic University grading experiment. It reviews the advantages and disadvantages traditionally ascribed to graded courses and analyzes the available research on this subject. The article concludes with the recommendations proposed by the clinical faculty. These recommendations are designed to maximize the advantages and minimize the disadvantages of a graded system of evaluation.

Publication Title

Clinical Law Review

Volume

3

Issue

2

First Page

299

Download

Share

COinS