Understanding the UCLA Law School Grading Curve

Many law schools across the United States, including UCLA School of Law, employ a norm-referenced grading curve. This system aims to distribute grades within a class according to a predetermined curve, often resembling a bell curve. Understanding how this curve functions and its implications is crucial for law students.

Norm-Referenced Grading: The Basics

In a norm-referenced grading system, the instructor grades each exam and then ranks the exams against each other. The instructor adjusts the initial grades so that the overall grade distribution aligns with the school's specified curve. "The curve" defines the permitted range for each letter grade. For instance, a curve might stipulate that 0-3% of students receive an A+, 3-7% receive an A, and so forth.

Curves differ among law schools, as do the rules governing whether the curve is mandatory or merely suggestive. The mandatory curve you will likely encounter once you enter law school is the main source of this competition.

UCLA Law School's Grading Curve: A Closer Look

Historical Shifts

When I was a UCLA Law School student in 1989-92, our curve was 20% As, 40% Bs, and 40% Cs or below (the “below” grades were optional and very rare) in each course. In the mid-90s, we shifted to 20% As, 60% Bs, and 20% Cs or below. Recently, we shifted to a 25-29% As, 41-52% B/B+s, 18-22% B-s, and 5-8% Cs or below for first year classes, and 23-27% As, 50-60% B/B+s, 17-23% B-s, and 0-10% Cs or below for second and third year classes (basically a 3.2 median, slightly below a B+).

Factors Influencing Grade Changes

As best I can tell, the increases in our grades have been driven by one main factor: The increases in grades at other schools. We shifted to a B median in the mid-90s because we noticed that most Top 20 schools had a B median. Our B- students were roughly comparable in class rank to B students at peer schools, but they looked worse to employers who weren’t that familiar with the UCLA system. We shifted to a B+ median recently because we noticed that most Top 20 schools had done the same. I’m pretty confident that we were at the trailing edge of the change, not the leading edge. We didn’t want to increase our grades beyond what others were doing, but we also didn’t want our students to be at a disadvantage. This sort of behavior may be bad in some overall sense. But it is sensible for a school that’s trying not to leave its students unfairly disadvantaged. If someone suggested some multi-law-school grading reform, I might endorse it (though I can’t speak to any antitrust law questions this might or might not raise).

The Impact of Grading on a Curve

Increased Competition

Grading on a curve contributes to the competitive atmosphere within law schools. Students are not only striving to master the material but also to outperform their peers. The mandatory curve you will likely encounter once you enter law school is the main source of this competition.

Grade Inflation Concerns

The increases in grades at other schools is the main reason for the increases in our grades. We shifted to a B median in the mid-90s because we noticed that most Top 20 schools had a B median. Our B- students were roughly comparable in class rank to B students at peer schools, but they looked worse to employers who weren’t that familiar with the UCLA system. We shifted to a B+ median recently because we noticed that most Top 20 schools had done the same. I’m pretty confident that we were at the trailing edge of the change, not the leading edge. We didn’t want to increase our grades beyond what others were doing, but we also didn’t want our students to be at a disadvantage. This sort of behavior may be bad in some overall sense. But it is sensible for a school that’s trying not to leave its students unfairly disadvantaged. If someone suggested some multi-law-school grading reform, I might endorse it (though I can’t speak to any antitrust law questions this might or might not raise).

Conveying Student Performance

Though I’m not wild about grade inflation, I should note that a B+ median still leaves plenty of gradations between students, especially when one averages together the grades in many classes. If everyone got A+s or As (which is more or less the system at Yale, with what I’m told is roughly 20-30% of each course getting Hs, and the rest getting Ps with the exception of a very few LPs and fails), that might pose more of a problem. But a system with plenty of A+s, As, A-s, B+s, Bs, and B-s, and occasional Cs (with some required in the first year) adequately conveys to employers which students tend to be better and which tend to be worse.

Alternatives to Traditional Grading

Some law schools have moved away from traditional grading systems to reduce student stress and promote a more collaborative learning environment. Harvard and Stanford, two of the top-ranked law schools, recently eliminated traditional grading altogether. Like Yale and the University of California, Berkeley, they now use a modified pass/fail system, reducing the pressure that law schools are notorious for. This new grading system also makes it harder for employers to distinguish the wheat from the chaff, which means more students can get a shot at a competitive interview.

Navigating Grade Grievances at UCLA Law

UCLA Law School has specific procedures in place to address grade grievances, ensuring fairness and transparency in the evaluation process.

Read also: Navigating Tech Breadth at UCLA

Grounds for a Grade Change

The Law School considers grades to be a matter of academic judgment and subject to challenge only where the instructor assigned a course grade or otherwise evaluated the student’s work using non- academic criteria that were not clearly and directly related to the student’s performance in the course.

The Grievance Process

The grievance process is initiated when the student submits a written appeal to the Vice Dean. The appeal must specify the grounds on which the grade is being challenged. The appeal must be filed within 60 calendar days after the contested grade was finalized. The appeal must completely explain the student’s belief that non‐academic criteria factored into the student’s grade. The appeal should provide any available evidence supporting the claim of unacceptable conduct. If the Vice Dean determines that the appeal fails to allege relevant types of unacceptable conduct, the Vice Dean shall return the appeal to the student with an explanation for the appeal’s deficiencies. The student must submit a revised written appeal within five days that alleges grounds this Standard recognizes as constituting unacceptable conduct. If the ad hoc committee determines that the written appeal fails to allege relevant types of unacceptable conduct, the committee shall recommend that the appeal be denied. Otherwise, within five business days after the ad hoc grievance committee is appointed, the committee’s chair shall provide the instructor with written notice of the appeal. The instructor shall provide the ad hoc grievance committee chair with the student’s exam answers or the other material on which the grade was based. The instructor may provide the committee chair with a written response to the appeal. If the instructor wishes to do so, the instructor must present such a response within 10 business days after receiving notice of the appeal from the chair. If the instructor provides such a response, the chair shall forward a copy to the student involved. The committee will not share the exam answers or other internal grading materials, including internal grading rubrics, with the student. The student shall have an opportunity to provide a written rebuttal to the instructor’s response. The ad hoc grievance committee shall meet in person or via videoconferencing to evaluate the appeal and any written materials provided by the instructor and student involved. Within ten business days after the conclusion of its deliberations, the ad hoc grievance committee chair will report its recommendation in writing, signed by all committee members, along with any minority views, to the Dean, Vice Dean, the student, and the instructor. The committee’s report shall state whether there is clear and convincing evidence that the instructor applied non-academic criteria. If, and only if, the ad hoc grievance committee finds such clear and convincing evidence, the committee may recommend one of the forms of relief set out below. The ad hoc grievance committee’s submission to the Dean shall include copies of the appeal and any other written materials provided by the student or the instructor. The ad hoc grievance committee’s report shall constitute a non-binding recommendation to the Dean. Based upon a review of the committee’s report and the supporting record, the Dean shall determine whether there is clear and convincing evidence that the instructor applied non-academic criteria. If and only if the Dean finds such clear and convincing evidence, the Dean may grant the student one of the forms of relief set out below. If the Dean does not so find, the Dean shall deny the appeal.

General Grade Change Rule

Except as otherwise provided in this Rule, all grades other than Incomplete or NR are final when filed by an instructor. Once final, grades may be changed only if the instructor involved is convinced that the grade initially recorded is incorrect because of a clerical, technological, mathematical, or procedural error, which was discovered after the initial grade was recorded. In each case of a grade change on the basis of such an error, the instructor shall file a written explanation and request for a grade change with the Vice Dean responsible for curricular matters (“Vice Dean”), explaining precisely the nature of the error. If the Vice Dean concurs that a change is appropriate, the Vice Dean shall authorize the Registrar to change the grade. Changes based on a clerical, technological, mathematical, or procedural error, will not be made more than 60 calendar days after the grade is issued.

Anonymity in Grading

To ensure fairness in final course grades, the School of Law uses an anonymous grading system for examinations. In those courses which examinations are graded anonymously (experiential courses and seminars are generally the only exception), students must place only their exam number on the exam or course paper. Students are therefore also cautioned against writing anything in exams or course papers that is extrinsic to the subject matter of the course, that might develop instructor sympathy, or that has behind it other non-objective motives. When aspects of a course are graded without anonymity, such as when a paper assignment cannot be graded anonymously or grading consideration is given for class participation, the Records Office combines the anonymous and non-anonymous scores into one final grade. Also, M.L.S. students are graded “off” the J.D. curve. As such, depending on how many M.L.S. Anonymous grading imposes reciprocal obligations. There is no mandatory distribution of grades for M.L.S. students whether they are in courses with J.D. students or courses with only M.L.S. In addition to the grade determined on an anonymous basis, an instructor may give a grade for class performance. This grade may be in the form of an increase or decrease, not exceeding one grading unit (e.g., B to B+ or B-, C+ to B- or to C), or it may be in the form of “points” awarded so long as the points provided for class participation do not exceed 20% of the total points available for the course. An instructor must announce not later than the end of the first week of instruction that grades for class performance will or may be given. The grade for class performance should reflect the quality (as distinguished from mere quantity) of a student’s participation in class discussion. A student should never be penalized for asking questions. However, the class performance grade may reflect a student’s attendance, level of preparation for class and/or performance on assigned exercises. Students may prospectively elect to be graded on a Pass/No Credit basis in no more than one (1) course, carrying no more than four (4) semester units of credit. The above option applies to courses in which letter grades would otherwise be assigned.

Read also: Understanding UCLA Counselors

tags: #UCLA #law #school #grading #curve