8 minute read
COVID-19, Year 2: How Have Overall Perceptions of Online J.D. Courses Changed?
PART 1
Overall, 16% of students reinterviewed in 2022 rate their likelihood to recommend online J.D. courses at a “9” or “10” on a zero-to-10 scale, the standard commonly used to characterize product or service users as “promoters”; this figure was up somewhat from 11% in 2021. Correspondingly, the proportion considered “detractors” (ratings of zero to six) fell from 71% to 61%.
The percentage of promoters rose most among students who were still attending about half their classes online (13% in 2021 to 24% in 2022) or continued to be mostly or completely online (10% to 28%).
Notably,thepercentageofdetractorsfellfrom68%to42%amongstudents whose classes were equally online and in-person, suggesting a hybrid format that combines advantages of in-person and online attendance is at least acceptable — if not overwhelmingly positive — to most of these students.
CHART 3
On a scale of zero to 10 where “0” means you are not at all likely and “10” means you are extremely likely, how likely is it that you would recommend online J.D. courses to family, friends or colleagues?
% Detractors (“0” to “6”) % Passives (“7” or “8”) % Promoters (“9” or “10”)
Due to rounding, totals may sum to 100%, +/-1 percentage point; percentages shown when >4%.
Students’ increased likelihood to recommend their online J.D. courses is reflected in improved perceptions of overall program quality among students who continued to take at least half of their classes online. In the Spring 2021 survey, there were wide gaps in quality ratings by students’ mode of instruction that academic year; among those who continued taking most or all of their classes in-person, 76% rated their J.D. program as excellent or good, vs. 51% of those who were about equally in-person and online and 57% of those who took most or all of their classes online.
Among students reinterviewed for the Spring 2022 survey, those gaps had narrowed considerably. Just over three-fourths of students whose schools hadreturnedtomostlyorcompletelyin-personclasses(78%)ratedtheir program quality as “excellent” or “good.” However, this metric was also high among those who were splitting their time evenly between in-person andonlineclassesorremainedmostlyorcompletelyonline(73%and72% respectively, though fewer in the latter group rated their program “excellent”).
CHART 4
How would you rate the quality of your current J.D. program?
Results by mode of instruction during each academic year
% Excellent % Good
Mostly or completely in-person
Equal time online and in-person
Mostly or completely online
Due to rounding, segment percentages may sum to shown totals, +/-1 percentage point.
Correspondingly, students in hybrid in-person/online or predominantly online formats were more likely in 2022 than they were in 2021 to say the quality of their program had improved since the start of the pandemic (Chart 5).
CHART 5
Please rate your level of agreement with the following item: Since the beginning of the pandemic, the quality of my J.D. program has improved.
Results by mode of instruction during each academic year
% Strongly agree % Agree
Equal time online and in-person
Mostly or completely online
Due to rounding, segment percentages may sum to shown totals, +/-1 percentage point.
The pattern was somewhat different regarding students’ perceptions that their J.D. program was “worth the cost.” In both the 2021 and 2022 surveys, about half of students who attended most or all of their classes in-person agreed their program was worth the cost. However, while students who split their time evenly between online and in-person classes were least likely in the 2021 study to say their program was worth the cost at 33%, in the 2022 study, 53% of students felt their hybrid program was worth the cost. Students who remained mostly or completely online, meanwhile, were least likely in the 2022 survey to say their program was worth the cost, at 36%.
Again, these findings are not representative of students beyond those included in these studies. For these students, however, results indicate hybrid in-person/online programs improved the most between the Spring 2021 and Spring 2022 semesters, in terms of perceived value.
CHART 6
Please rate your level of agreement with the following item: The education I am currently receiving in my J.D. program is worth the cost.
Results by mode of instruction during each academic year
% Strongly agree % Agree
Mostly or completely in-person
Equal time online and in-person
Mostly or completely online
Due to rounding, segment percentages may sum to shown totals, +/-1 percentage point.
The year-to-year comparisons by instructional mode in Charts 4 through 6 should be evaluated in light of the considerable change in the student composition of those groups over the comparison period. In the Spring 2021 survey, the online group included the vast majority of students, but by the Spring 2022 survey, most fell into the in-person category.
However, it is also worth noting that program quality and value ratings improved about as much among students who remained online for half or more of their classes in both the 2020-21 and 2021-22 academic years as they did among students who returned from hybrid or predominantly online arrangements in AY 2020-21 to mostly or completely in-person classes in AY 2021-22.
In other words, an additional year of refining and adapting to online programs appears to have had a commensurate impact on perceived program quality and value as a return to in-person courses.
CHART 7
How would you rate the quality of your current J.D. program? Percentage “Excellent” or “Good” among students who remained online for at least half of classes in both years, vs. those who returned from online to in-person classes in AY2021-22
Results by mode of instruction during each academic year
% Excellent % Good
Online for half or more classes in AY 2020-21, mostly/completely in-person in AY 2021-22
Online for half or more classes in both academic years
Due to rounding, segment percentages may sum to shown totals, +/-1 percentage point.
Hybrid J.D. Programs Seek to Maintain Quality While Improving Access
The increase in the perceived cost effectiveness of hybrid programs among the students surveyed bodes well for law schools aiming to improve the value of increasingly common hybrid programs. Prior to the pandemic, fewer than 10 law schools — including Mitchell Hamline School of Law and the University of Dayton School of Law — had received variances from the ABA allowing them to offer hybrid J.D. programs with more than one-third of credits earned online.
Since COVID-19 forced all schools to adopt distance learning capabilities, hybrid inperson/online programs are expected to become increasingly available as a permanent option. In 2020, the ABA adopted new resolutions to allow law schools to temporarily offer J.D. programs online without fear of violating accreditation standards related to distance education. Normally, the ABA only allows accredited law schools to grant up to one-third of credits required for graduation for online courses.6
Some law schools are already offering hybrid programs on a permanent basis, with several only requiring students to visit their campuses a few times a year, thereby extending access to more students who do not live within driving distance of campus.7 But no matter how hybrid programs are implemented, less time spent commuting to and from campus makes it easier for students to balance other responsibilities, such as family and work, as the 2022 study shows.
6 https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/various-legal-ed-proposals-approved-by-aba-house-of-delegates 7 https://www.onlinejddegree.com/choosing/aba-approved-hybrid-law-schools/
14
CHART 8
Which mode of classroom instruction leaves more time for you to do the following?
% Online % In-person % Both leave same amount of time % Neither leaves the time
The spread of hybrid J.D. formats will likely depend, in part, on law schools’ ability to demonstrate such programs are as rigorous and likely to lead to positive outcomes as predominantly in-person formats. In particular, law schools will need to develop strategies for minimizing the dampening effect of the online modality on students’ class participation and the quality of their interactions with faculty and peers.
Among students whose classes were, and continue to be, mostly or completely online, there was an increased percentage who said they had meaningful interactions with their professors during online courses — 39% in 2021 vs. 53% in 2022. Similarly, students whose classes were mostly or completely online were more likely in 2022 than they were in 2021 to say they had meaningful interactions with their classmates in online courses — 24% vs. 36%.
However, most of these increases can be attributed to the greater likelihood of students who took all or most of their classes online in AY 2021-22 to be at tier-four schools (Chart 2). Regardless of instructional mode, students at tier-four schools were more likely than those in higher-ranked schools to say they had meaningful interactions with both professors and classmates (Table 1).
TABLE 1:
Please rate your level of agreement with the following statements: I have ________ in my online J.D. courses during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Percentage “Strongly agree” and “Agree,” Spring 2022
Had meaningful interactions with professors in online courses
Had meaningful interactions with classmates in online courses
Tier-one schools Students at:
Tier-two schools Tier-three schools Tier-four schools
32% 35% 36% 48%
23% 25% 21% 40%
The finding that students at tier-four schools rate the quality of their interactions more highly itself has important implications, as the accessibility mission and lower selectivity of tier-four schools makes them more likely to innovate with distance-learning techniques to meet a broader range of student needs. To the extent those schools are also more focused on making faculty accessible and promoting supportive peer interactions, they have a distinct advantage in making online classes work for students.
