As law schools look to expand their online programs, they’re facing a balancing act: How do they make legal education more accessible without compromising quality or institutional reputation? As technology advances and learner expectations evolve, building programs that reflect the identity of the institution while reaching new audiences in a meaningful way will be the key to success.
I was curious how law schools should be thinking about this moment and what it takes to build a successful online legal education program. Stephen Burnett, a law school adviser at AllCampus and former Seattle University School of Law information technology dean with more than four decades of experience in legal education and educational technology, has spent his career helping institutions navigate these challenges. I wanted to get his perspective on what’s driving the momentum behind online legal education, how schools can preserve their brand as they expand and where the biggest opportunities lie for the future.
Q: What is driving the growing interest in online legal education, and why is this becoming such an important conversation for law school leaders?
A: There are several factors driving the growing interest in online legal education. One of those factors is enrollment-driven. As budgets become more challenging for law school deans and their university partners to manage, schools are looking for ways to expand their enrollments beyond the traditional residential J.D. model.
Of the approximately 200 ABA-accredited law schools, there are nearly 70 that offer part-time programs. The reality of today’s work environment is making it difficult to attract qualified students to traditional four-night-a-week residential part-time programs, and many of these programs have experienced declining enrollments for several years. In response, nearly half of these part-time programs, along with some newly created programs, are now being offered either fully online or in a hybrid format.
These institutions have recognized that they can attract highly qualified candidates who otherwise would not be able to attend a traditional residential program. These candidates are typically older, have significant work experience and now have the flexibility to pursue a law degree. In fact, most of the deans I have spoken with report that the qualifications of these students are often stronger than those of their full-time residential students.
This shift has allowed many schools to significantly increase enrollment in their part-time programs without sacrificing quality. It has also expanded access to prospective students living in geographic areas that are not close to a law school, making it possible for many to earn a law degree who otherwise would not have had that opportunity.
Q: As more law schools expand into online education, how can they increase access for new learners without compromising the quality or reputation that defines their institution?
A: In the first question, we discussed the growth of online and hybrid traditional J.D. programs. A second area experiencing rapid growth is online master of legal studies (M.L.S.) and master of law (L.L.M.) programs.
The online M.L.S. is typically a 30-credit-hour program that can be completed in two years or less. These programs offer tracks or concentrations for students who are not interested in becoming lawyers but need an understanding of the regulatory environment they work in. Most of these students are working professionals looking to advance within their organizations or improve their marketability in areas like compliance, health law, human resources law, business law, intellectual property and, more recently, AI law.
Today, a vast majority of law schools offer M.L.S. degrees, and several report enrollments in these programs that far exceed their residential J.D. programs. These programs allow law schools to leverage their core competencies to reach students that they were not reaching before. Because the ABA does not regulate M.L.S. programs beyond approving their creation, they are not factored into reputational metrics that count against an institution’s quality numbers. In spite of that fact, schools are being diligent in the quality of these programs and what they offer to these students.
L.L.M. programs serve students who already hold a J.D. In recent years, online L.L.M. offerings have become much more specialized, allowing practicing attorneys to deepen their expertise in specific areas of law. At the same time, many schools have experienced a decline in international students enrolling in traditional residential L.L.M. programs. Online L.L.M.s in topical areas provide U.S.-based practicing lawyers with the opportunity to earn an advanced degree without putting their careers on hold.
Q: What opportunities do you think law schools are overlooking as they build or expand online programs, and what should they be doing now to prepare for the future of online legal education programs?
A: Online legal education has developed more slowly than online education in other disciplines. In my view, law faculties have been hesitant to embrace the many potential benefits of online education partially because the majority of law faculty members have not been trained in learning theory or innovative approaches to delivering legal education. That is changing for the better, but it is still a hindrance to the adoption of online law programs.
One opportunity is for law schools to invest in highly skilled instructional designers and integrate them into the curriculum-development process. By working closely with law faculty, instructional designers can help create more engaging teaching methods and effective online learning experiences. Schools should also continue educating alumni, employers and other stakeholders about the quality and effectiveness of online legal education. Demonstrating how online legal education can help train new lawyers who may live and practice in areas of a jurisdiction that do not have access to quality legal services is another benefit to the legal and political establishment.
Law schools can begin by incorporating more online components to their existing residential offerings. As the faculty, institution and other stakeholders in the community gain more firsthand experience with the outcomes that can be achieved through well-designed online legal education, the acceptance and expansion of online will follow.
As more students complete online J.D.s, we will have more data to support the quality of those outcomes. Some deans and other law faculty are concerned about the potential for lower bar-passage rates among online learners than among traditional residential students. Long-term data on outcomes, along with employment and placement data of online learners, will help alleviate that concern.
Ultimately, I believe institutions, accreditors and the legal community would benefit from embracing an outcomes-focused mindset, while expanding access to both legal education and legal services in the process.
