After ABA Sanction, John Marshall Dean Says School Is Committed to Improve Bar-Pass Rate
Atlanta's John Marshall Law School is among 10 nationwide that the American Bar Association has publicly disciplined since August 2016 for violating its admissions rules by enrolling students it says are not likely to graduate and pass the bar. Per an Oct. 12 letter from the ABA's Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, the school must submit a report demonstrating compliance to the committee by Feb. 1 or appear before it at its meeting in late June.
November 28, 2017 at 02:50 PM
8 minute read
John Marshall Law School, Atlanta
The dean of Atlanta's John Marshall Law School says the school has been exploring “a number of creative alternatives” to help comply with American Bar Association rules governing admissions standards.
The for-profit school is among 10 nationwide that the ABA's Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar has publicly disciplined since August 2016 for enrolling students it says are not likely to graduate and pass the bar. The sanctions range from letters of noncompliance—one of which John Marshall received in October—to censure to probation.
John Marshall Dean Malcolm Morris said the sanctions are due to the school's first-time taker bar-pass rate, which Morris acknowledged needs to improve. The rate for the July 2017 exam was 51.7 percent, down from 64.3 percent on the July 2012 exam, according to the state Office of Bar Admissions.
“The challenge is how to achieve [pass-rate improvement] in a manner consistent with preserving our historic mission,” Morris said in an e-mail. “There is not an easy way to balance these two important objectives. … Atlanta's John Marshall Law School has a long-standing commitment to serving the legal needs of our community, and will take the necessary measures to ensure it continues to do so.”
The ABA accreditation committee concluded that John Marshall is “significantly out of compliance” with the accreditation requirements that schools “maintain sound admissions policies” and not “admit an applicant who does not appear capable of satisfactorily completing its program of legal education and being admitted to the bar.”
The ABA posted the letter of noncompliance on its website Oct. 12, after the committee considered the matter at its September meeting.
The council also concluded that John Marshall is out of compliance with the requirements that schools “maintain a rigorous program of legal education that prepares its students, upon graduation, for admission to the bar and for effective, ethical, and responsible participation as members of the legal profession” and “provide academic support designed to afford students a reasonable opportunity to complete the program of legal education, graduate and become members of the legal profession.”
John Marshall must submit a report to the committee by Feb. 1 and appear before it at its meeting in late June, unless the information in the written report demonstrates compliance with the standards. In that case, the committee may find the school to be in compliance and cancel the hearing. The school remains accredited by the ABA throughout this disciplinary process, according to Barry Currier, the ABA's managing director of accreditation and legal education. He e-mailed his comments to Law.com, which is owned by the Daily Report's parent company, ALM.
Actions like the ABA's recent crackdown on lax admissions standards are rare. Most recently, the committee voted to place Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego on probation for its noncompliance with admission standards.
The ABA examined the schools' Law School Admission Test scores and undergraduate grades of admitted students, bar passage rates and academic support programs when reaching its conclusions.
Currier attributed the disciplinary actions in general to widespread changes in legal education over the past seven or so years, namely the national decline of applicants. If schools were already challenged in meeting the ABA's admissions standards in 2010, then they are even moreso today in light of the declining number and quality of applicants, he said.
“It is logical to ask these schools to demonstrate that the students who are coming into their programs have a reasonable likelihood of success with academics and on the licensing or bar exam, and that the schools have programs to maximize the students' likelihood of success,” Currier said in the e-mail to Law.com.
“Given our current processes, some of the matters that have recently come to a head actually began some time ago as a result of changing market forces.”
The median LSAT score of John Marshall's 2012 entering class was 150, while its median GPA was 2.99, according to ABA required disclosure forms. By 2016, the median LSAT score had slipped to 148, while the GPA crept up to 3.05.
The dean of
The for-profit school is among 10 nationwide that the ABA's Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar has publicly disciplined since August 2016 for enrolling students it says are not likely to graduate and pass the bar. The sanctions range from letters of noncompliance—one of which John Marshall received in October—to censure to probation.
John Marshall Dean Malcolm Morris said the sanctions are due to the school's first-time taker bar-pass rate, which Morris acknowledged needs to improve. The rate for the July 2017 exam was 51.7 percent, down from 64.3 percent on the July 2012 exam, according to the state Office of Bar Admissions.
“The challenge is how to achieve [pass-rate improvement] in a manner consistent with preserving our historic mission,” Morris said in an e-mail. “There is not an easy way to balance these two important objectives. …
The ABA accreditation committee concluded that John Marshall is “significantly out of compliance” with the accreditation requirements that schools “maintain sound admissions policies” and not “admit an applicant who does not appear capable of satisfactorily completing its program of legal education and being admitted to the bar.”
The ABA posted the letter of noncompliance on its website Oct. 12, after the committee considered the matter at its September meeting.
The council also concluded that John Marshall is out of compliance with the requirements that schools “maintain a rigorous program of legal education that prepares its students, upon graduation, for admission to the bar and for effective, ethical, and responsible participation as members of the legal profession” and “provide academic support designed to afford students a reasonable opportunity to complete the program of legal education, graduate and become members of the legal profession.”
John Marshall must submit a report to the committee by Feb. 1 and appear before it at its meeting in late June, unless the information in the written report demonstrates compliance with the standards. In that case, the committee may find the school to be in compliance and cancel the hearing. The school remains accredited by the ABA throughout this disciplinary process, according to Barry Currier, the ABA's managing director of accreditation and legal education. He e-mailed his comments to Law.com, which is owned by the Daily Report's parent company, ALM.
Actions like the ABA's recent crackdown on lax admissions standards are rare. Most recently, the committee voted to place
The ABA examined the schools' Law School Admission Test scores and undergraduate grades of admitted students, bar passage rates and academic support programs when reaching its conclusions.
Currier attributed the disciplinary actions in general to widespread changes in legal education over the past seven or so years, namely the national decline of applicants. If schools were already challenged in meeting the ABA's admissions standards in 2010, then they are even moreso today in light of the declining number and quality of applicants, he said.
“It is logical to ask these schools to demonstrate that the students who are coming into their programs have a reasonable likelihood of success with academics and on the licensing or bar exam, and that the schools have programs to maximize the students' likelihood of success,” Currier said in the e-mail to Law.com.
“Given our current processes, some of the matters that have recently come to a head actually began some time ago as a result of changing market forces.”
The median LSAT score of John Marshall's 2012 entering class was 150, while its median GPA was 2.99, according to ABA required disclosure forms. By 2016, the median LSAT score had slipped to 148, while the GPA crept up to 3.05.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFrom 'Confusing Labyrinth' to Speeding 'Roller Coaster': Uncertainty Reigns in Title IX as Litigators Await Second Trump Admin
6 minute read'The Court Will Take Action': Judge Upbraids Combative Rudy Giuliani During Outburst at Hearing
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250