William E. Adams
Managing Director
As I have mentioned in previous columns, my original hope when becoming Managing Director was that I could work with the Council in reviewing some of our Standards and Rules that merit reconsideration and review. However, the emergency measures needed to deal with the ever-changing challenges posed by the COVID pandemic caused a delay in the ability to look at “big picture” issues. This is not to indicate that the Council has only been focused on providing guidance to schools about COVID issues. The Council has approved several changes to its Standards, Rules, and Bylaws throughout the pandemic, including some of considerable significance. A few of these significant changes include amendments to Standards 205, 303, 507, and 508 as well as changes to distance education requirements. In addition, the Council has a number of proposed amendments that will be submitted to the American Bar Association House of Delegates at its Annual Meeting in August, which include amendments to Standard 206. The Council’s Questionnaire and Template Committee has also been busy discussing new data collection, mostly involving additional collection of data relevant to its commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion.
The time has now arrived, however, for the Council to engage in the work that I hoped we would be able to consider when I began in this position. On April 19, Council Chair Leo Martinez and I posted a memorandum announcing the creation of a Strategic Review Committee. As it notes, as an accrediting agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education, the Council is required to undertake regular and systematic review of its accrediting standards. 34 C.F.R. § 602.21. The Council typically meets this requirement through the annual and ongoing work on the Standards. However, occasionally the Council undertakes a more comprehensive look as described in the Council’s Internal Operating Practice #9 which provides:
In addition to the regular and ongoing review of the Standards and Rules of Procedure, the Council may engage in a comprehensive review of the Standards and Rules of Procedure or specific segments of them whenever the Council determines that a more comprehensive review would serve the interests of legal education. Generally, the Council would create an ad hoc committee to assist the Council in this work.
Pursuant to this, the Council has appointed an ad hoc “Strategic Review Committee” (SRC) to undertake this work. The Strategic Review Committee will be co-chaired by Daniel R. Thies, an attorney in private practice in Champaign-Urbana, Illinois, and by Rebecca H. White, Dean and Professor Emerita of the University of Georgia School of Law. It will be comprised of members of the standing Standards Committee, augmented by an additional Council member and three external, non-Council members to facilitate the greater workload it will likely undertake. The committee’s roster is as follows:
• Scott Bales, Chief Justice (retired), Arizona Supreme Court
• Mary Lu Bilek, Dean (retired), CUNY School of Law
• Craig Boise, Dean, Syracuse University College of Law
• Becky King, Accreditation Counsel (retired), ABA Section of Legal Education & Admissions to the Bar
• Cynthia Martin, Chief Judge, Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District
• Charles Nash, Senior Vice Chancellor Emeritus for Academic & Student Affairs, The University of Alabama System
• Carla Pratt, Dean and Professor, Washburn University School of Law
• Barbara Sestak, Professor, Portland State University School of Architecture
• Adrien Wing, Associate Dean for International & Comparative Law Programs and Professor, University of Iowa College of Law
Rebecca H. White, Becky King, and Cynthia Martin are the external, non-Council members of the Strategic Review Committee. Judge Martin was a member of the former Accreditation Committee and will also bring her expertise from her leadership positions with the National Conference of Bar Examiners. Dean White is a former member of the Council and a former chair and member of the aforementioned Accreditation Committee. Becky King is a former staff member in the Managing Director’s Office and brings extensive knowledge of the legislative history of the Standards and Rules, including service as the staff liaison to the last committee that engaged in a comprehensive review of the standards. Kirsten Winek, the Section’s Accreditation Counsel, will be the Strategic Review Committee’s staff liaison.
It is anticipated that the SRC, which commenced organizational work following the November 2021 Council meeting, will take longer than a year to complete its review. As noted, it is an ad hoc committee, nevertheless, and will disband upon completion of its mission. The Standards Committee will continue to function, addressing routine changes as necessary.
Changes proposed by the Strategic Review Committee will follow the same process utilized by the Standards Committee when it makes recommendations to the Council. The Strategic Review Committee will present its recommendations to the Council, which can accept, modify, or reject those recommendations. The Council will then post the revisions for Notice and Comment, generally allowing 30 days for Public Comment. After the Notice and Comment period, comments will be reviewed and considered by the SRC which will make its final recommendation to the Council. If the Council approves these revisions, they go to the ABA’s House of Delegates for concurrence. Revisions go into effect once they are concurred in by the ABA’s House of Delegates. However, the final decision concerning approval of any proposed change remains with the Council, regardless of concurrence by the House.
Consistent with the Standards Committee’s practices, various methods, as appropriate, will be used to obtain stakeholder feedback and input on Standards revisions. For example, in addition to the Notice and Comment period, the Standards Committee has hosted Roundtable events to solicit feedback on certain topics related to contemplated Standards revisions.
As most of the readers of this column are aware, the SRC made its initial recommendation to the Council at the May meeting, recommending changes to our admission requirements, including the current requirement that all applicants must take a “valid and reliable” admission test. The Notice seeking comment may already have been sent by the time this column is published. We anticipate several comments as we are aware that many persons and groups have an interest and opinion about the proposal, as evidenced by the attention already given by various media sources.
We anticipate that this will not be the only proposal to generate attention and debate. It would be surprising if any process that entails a thoughtful examination of the direction of legal education and accreditation does not generate discussion and debate. We look forward to engaging with those interested in legal education over the next several months as this process unfolds.