Last February, the Student Bar Association (SBA) conducted the first annual student survey to help it better understand the position of students and advocate for them. Some areas surveyed included opinions on online classes, the grading system, Inns of Court, the Legislation and Regulation course, inclusivity on campus, Career Center services, and course registration. The survey was taken by nearly 500 students and represented a wide cross-section of the law school community. Below are some key takeaways from the survey, the results of which are available to view here.
SBA Performance. Many students are dissatisfied or indifferent to the SBA’s performance, suggesting that the SBA may not be meeting the expectations of a large portion of the student body. One common criticism is the poor planning of events like the Barrister’s Ball and Lawlloween, including logistical issues and delays. Further, students expressed frustration over the lack of transparency and communication from the SBA, with some stating that they were unaware of what the SBA actually does beyond organizing a few social events.
Overall Satisfaction and Inclusivity. Overall satisfaction among students is mixed. Comments indicate that many students have concerns about their experience at GW Law including the competitive environment, stress levels, and perceived lack of support for students from diverse backgrounds. Over one quarter of respondents indicated that they do not “feel included or that [their] background is represented at GW Law.” Some students pointed out the lack of diversity among faculty and the underrepresentation of minority groups in student organizations and leadership positions. Others reported feeling isolated due to their socioeconomic status, race, or gender identity, while others highlighted the need for more support and representation for part-time students, international students, students of color, and LGBTQ+ students.
Part Time and International Students. Part-time students struggle specifically with limited evening course options, making it difficult to complete required credits. And international students feel there is a lack of academic and job search support tailored to their needs.
Fundamentals of Lawyering (FL) and the Inns of Court Program. Students expressed concerns about inconsistencies in the course, particularly regarding the quality of instruction across different professors. Students had mixed reviews, where some felt the course did not adequately prepare them for practical legal writing tasks, while others appreciated the focus on fundamental lawyering skills. Most students agreed that they would have been incentivized to participate in Inns if they could have earned credit for attending. Many students criticized the program for being redundant and not tailored to their specific needs, particularly for those with prior professional experience or other non-traditional backgrounds.
Grading. Students raised concerns about the size of grading bands and the lack of transparency in how grades are assigned. Some felt the grading policies were ambiguous or unclear. Some find grading unfair, especially regarding the distinction between small and large class grading curves. It is worth noting that since February, the grading policies have been changed.
Course Registration. Students are frustrated by the lack of timely information regarding registration, having to secure spots in required classes, and potentially being dropped from courses. Scheduling conflicts and lack of real-time updates on class availability are additional stressors affecting students.
Career Center. A large portion of the student body was critical of the Career Center. Comments indicate the Career Center being out-of-touch with the realities of the job market and not providing adequate support for students pursuing non-traditional career paths. Particularly, the Career Center provides inadequate support for finding paid jobs and navigating the job market. Some students also criticized the timing of Career Center programming, pointing out that crucial job postings were already closed by the time the Career Center addressed them in the Inns of Court sessions.
Physical Facilities. Many comments highlight issues with outdated classrooms, inadequate study spaces, and poorly maintained common areas. Students want improvements to the physical infrastructure including better classroom technology and more comfortable and functional study spaces.
Faculty. Some students feel that the quality of teaching and support varies significantly across different professors and courses. There is a slight preference for full-time professors, especially for foundational courses, with adjuncts preferred for specialized or advanced courses. Students have had varying experiences with adjunct faculty. Some are highly regarded for their practical knowledge, while others are criticized for being less available or effective. With respect to politically partisan adjuncts, most students are okay with their teaching, so long as it does not lead to grading discrimination or a hostile environment. Comments indicate that professors must maintain respect and neutrality in the classroom.
Legislation and Regulation. Overall, while some students recognized the value of the course content, many found it redundant, poorly structured, and unnecessarily burdensome in the context of their overall 1L experience. Many students find that “Leg-Reg” overlaps with other courses like Constitutional Law and Administrative Law, and suggest it could be combined with other subjects, made optional, or condensed into a shorter class with only one or two credits. The unnecessary length added unnecessary stress to an already packed spring semester. While the “Leg” part was valued by students, it is often repetitive. The “Reg” part often lacked depth. Furthermore, the quality of Leg-Reg depends heavily on the instructor and students call for more standardization or consistency, perhaps by only having experienced or permanent faculty teach it. Moreover, the timing and structure of the course put part-time students at a disadvantage, particularly with respect to the Fundamentals of Lawyering program which involved many topics from Leg-Reg taught co-curricularly.
