Legal News

Grading the Law School Grading Curve

By Dan Slater

Ah, the almighty law school grading curve, a never-ending source of controversy, consternation and confusion.

But do curves — whether they have low or high C distributions — even matter? That was the question being tossed around at LB headquarters this morning when this story, about a recent student survey at Hastings law school, came across our desk. The survey determined that nearly 80% of respondents were unhappy with the school’s grading system. The reason? Under the Hastings curve, only 20% of students can receive A’s.

“I think the perception is, among many students, that having a C on your transcript harms your chances of competing,” said Hastings 3L Andrew Ziaja, who authored the student poll. “The students responded very favorably to UCLA’s system” — which dropped the C-curve from 40% to 20% — “and to Boalt’s. I think these systems are favorable because these are the schools that our students see themselves as competing with, and they want to appear on paper as close to these students as possible.”

Again, we ask, does it matter? The Law Blog has always believed that, when it comes to grades, class rank is the primary factor considered by employers. For speciality shops, like, say, a products liability firm, specific class grades (i.e. torts) may be important, but, overall, doesn’t rank and rank alone determine whether a student lands interviews?

In the article, Hastings’ academic dean, Shauna Marshall, acknowledged this: “If you were in the bottom half with a C and now you’re in the bottom half with B, the employer will still see that you’re in the bottom half. And changing our curve is not going to change that fact.” Still, she said, “The curve should be relaxed because it’s the right thing to do and because the students become stressed about grades.”

What say you Loyal LB’ers? Where do you come out on The Curve?

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on February 26, 2008 (boomark / email).