Empower the Student, Liberate the Professor: Self-Assessment by Comparative Analysis

Abstract

A lawyer must learn over the course of his career, without the benefit of professor guidance and feedback. Thus, experts in legal education have argued that law professors should teach students to be self-regulated learners - to be conscious of their learning process so they can transfer what they learn to the next task, be it another law school course or a new client’s case. They have also argued that law professors should assess student learning as learning occurs, rather than giving a single end-of-semester exam. However, use of formative assessment - assessing student learning throughout the semester - can be perceived as a burden on professors. This Article proposes a method of formative assessment that allows the professor to intervene during the learning process without engaging in labor-intensive assessments such as critiquing student memos and conferencing. At the same time, it presents students with the opportunity to self-regulate their learning. We have called this method “Self-Assessment by Comparative Analysis.” In short, Self-Assessment by Comparative Analysis requires a student to compare his own work to the work of an expert on the same project, analyze the differences, and to identify what he needs to improve and how he will improve it, focusing on both his product and his process. The Article explains self-regulated learning theory and how Self-Assessment by Comparative Analysis applies the theory. Although the Article explains Self-Assessment by Comparative Analysis in the context of a legal writing course, its usefulness is not confined to the legal writing classroom. It could be used in large doctrinal courses and in academic support programs.