HELP
ENROLL NOW
LOGIN
JD-Next: Research and Evidence
Explore multiple validity studies that show how JD-Next is a valid and reliable predictor of law school readiness and success while promoting opportunity for all.
Science and Validity of JD-Next
Multiple validity studies have shown that JD-Next test scores are strong predictors of law school grades, offering a significant improvement over existing admissions tools in forecasting academic performance:
- JD-Next focuses on teaching case reading, legal reasoning, and other essential skills that are directly applicable to success in law school.
- The assessment is modeled after actual law school exams, producing scores that are both reliable and valid for making informed admissions decisions.
- Research shows that students who participated in JD-Next achieved GPAs up to 0.20 points higher than their peers in control groups.
- A key advantage over traditional standardized tests is that JD-Next demonstrates little to no score gap between minority and majority racial and ethnic groups.
- In today's post-affirmative action landscape, the program serves as an important tool for promoting equity and diversity in legal education.
An Alternative to Legacy Admissions Tests
This white paper summarizes the innovative approach of our program in proving aspiring law students with a realistic preview of law school and emphasizing practical skills over traditional test scores. Through detailed research and analysis, the primary takeaways of this paper are:
- Showcasing the development and implementation of JD-Next as a groundbreaking solution to improve law school performance
- JD-Next promotes equitable access to legal education for all students
- Underscoring the significance of JD-Next in minimizing score disparities between different racial and ethnic groups
- Highlighting recent validation studies that demonstrate the strong predictive power of JD-Next test scores in forecasting law school grades
JD-Next: An Alternative to Legacy Admissions Tests for Law Schools
A Reliable Tool to Predict Law School Success
- The JD-Next exam reliably predicted first-year law school performance, comparable to traditional exams like the LSAT and GRE.
- JD-Next demonstrated smaller and non-significant racial and ethnic disparities in scores compared to traditional exams.
- It measures students' ability to perform tasks directly related to law school, such as case reading and analysis.
- The test emphasizes potential and readiness, reducing reliance on measures that reflect socioeconomic and educational inequalities.
Admissions tests have increasingly come under attack by those seeking to broaden access and reduce disparities in higher education. Meanwhile, in other sectors there is a movement towards "work-sample" or "proximal" testing. Especially for underrepresented students, the goal is to measure not just the accumulated knowledge and skills that they would bring to a new academic program, but also their ability to grow and learn through the program. The JD-Next is a fully online, noncredit, 7- to 10-week course to train potential JD students in case reading and analysis skills, prior to their first year of law school. This study tests the validity and reliability of the JD-Next exam as a potential admissions tool for juris doctor programs of education. (In a companion article, we report on the efficacy of the course for preparing students for law school.) In 2019, we recruited a national sample of potential JD students, enriched for racial/ethnic diversity, along with a sample of volunteers at one university (N = 62). In 2020, we partnered with 17 law schools around the country to recruit a cohort of their incoming law students (N = 238). At the end of the course, students were incentivized to take and perform well on an exam that we graded with a standardized methodology. We collected first-semester grades as an outcome variable, and compared JD-Next exam properties to legacy exams now used by law schools (the Law School Admissions Test (LSAT), including converted GRE scores). We found that the JD-Next exam was a valid and reliable predictor of law school performance, comparable to legacy exams. For schools ranked outside the Top 50, we found that the legacy exams lacked significant incremental validity in our sample, but the JD-Next exam provided a significant advantage. We also replicated known, substantial racial and ethnic disparities on the legacy exam scores, but estimate smaller, nonsignificant score disparities on the JD-Next exam. Together this research suggests that, as an admissions tool, the JD-Next exam may reduce the risk that capable students will be excluded from legal education and the legal profession.
The Association of Participating in a Summer Prelaw Training Program and First-Year Law School Students' Grades
- Participation in the 8-week JD-Next program was associated with higher first-semester grades, particularly in Contracts Law and overall GPA.
- Participants reported feeling more prepared for law school after completing the course.
- JD-Next showed potential to address disparities in readiness and support underrepresented students.
- The JD-Next test reliably predicted first-year law school performance.
This study estimates the association of participation in a nine-week online educational program to prepare students for post-graduate (juris doctorate) education and law school grades. We collected registrar data from 17 U.S. law schools for participants and non-participants from the same year and a prior year. We compared first-semester law school grades between participating and non-participating students weighted by propensity scores. Course participation was associated with improved first-semester grades in a keyed course (Contracts Law) and overall grade point average. According to pre- and post-survey responses, a substantial portion of those who completed the program reported feeling more prepared for law school.
Letter in Support of JD-Next as a Third Admissions Exam Under Standard 503
- Black individuals make up 13.4% of the U.S. population but only 8.3% of students in ABA-accredited law schools. JD-Next demonstrates little to no racial disparity in outcomes.
- JD-Next combines a low-cost prep course with an admissions test, boosting readiness and predicting law school success.
- Adjusting disclosure rules to reflect the primary test score used in admissions could reduce reliance on racially disparate metrics.
- Peer-reviewed studies confirm JD-Next's equity-focused design and effectiveness in addressing systemic inequities in legal education.
California Association of Black Lawyers
Abstract: We urge the Council to accept the JD-Next exam as a third admissions test satisfying the mandate of Standard 503, consistent with Dr. Nathan Kuncel's conclusion that JD-Next is a valid and reliable test, as Standard 503 requires. We also ask that you adjust school disclosure requirements to apply only to the test scores that schools rely upon. Nationally, ABA data shows that while Black people are 13.4% of the United States population, only 8.3% of students in ABA accredited law schools are Black. We have a long way to go to achieve equity in law school admissions! We believe JD Next can improve the number of African American lawyers in the profession in the near future. This is the mission of the California Association of Black Lawyers and we are committed to increasing diversity in the profession. In a recent article, Aaron Taylor (Executive Director of AccessLex Center for Legal Education Excellence), explains that, "the manner in which the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) drives the vetting of law school applications ensures that Black applicants face steep disadvantages in gaining admission. To maximize their rankings, law schools use the racially-disparate test not only for admissions decisions but also to award "merit-based" financial aid, which means heavy debt loads for Black students as well.