The results of the recent CLS Student Senate survey demonstrate that our student body is suffering immensely in the pandemic, and certain structural elements of our legal education are exacerbating the problem. Of the nearly 430 students who responded, over 82% indicated that they experienced heightened anxiety, and over 65% indicated that they experienced heightened depression this Fall. Importantly, students noted that the cost of tuition, the lack of a reading week, complications during the exam period, and the falsehood that "we have adjusted" contributed significantly to mental health problems. 

This petition was written by student senators based on the 500+ survey comments, and it was approved by the Student Senate with overwhelming support. Do you hear us CLS? We are not okay. It's time to make some changes. 

Here are our demands:

1. Host an open town hall with the Deans of the Law School. CLS students feel unheard and believe the concerns they raise are not being seriously addressed. While some frustration is inherent to the transition to a new, unprecedented hybrid learning environment, many students have expressed confusion and dissatisfaction regarding certain policy decisions shaping the 2020-2021 academic year. To that end, having school administrators directly address student concerns and explain why choices were made will help students understand the difficult decisions made by administrators. Likewise, it will help administrators understand how the current learning environment is affecting students in different circumstances. 

2. Refund a portion of tuition and university fees. CLS students, especially students from low-income families, are facing extreme financial burdens as a result of COVID-19. Furthermore, the pandemic invariably decreased the quality of our legal education and limited access to campus resources. As such, it was unreasonable to increase the cost of tuition for the 2020-2021 academic year. While the university has had unanticipated costs associated with changing to a hybrid format, the school nonetheless has incredible financial resources and should devote some of those resources to refunding a portion of tuition/fees and increasing the financial aid grants to students. 

3. Build back in a full study week prior to exams. Throughout the survey, students indicated that the lack of a study period was one of the greatest causes of stress and anxiety leading up to and during the exam period. Although professors were made aware of the lack of a study period, many students -- especially 1Ls -- were learning new material on Thursday and sitting for a cumulative exam on Monday. The lack of time to catch up, learn, process, and outline before exams adversely affected mental health for most, if not all, students. We ask that you build a study week back into the Spring 2020 semester by pushing back the exam schedule.

4. Eliminate discretionary grading for the duration of the pandemic. We acknowledge that discretionary grading is rarely used. However, even the possibility of discretionary grading has generated a great deal of anxiety in an already stressful year. Because students are displaced across the globe in vastly different circumstances, the grading curve itself is not an equitable indicator of academic performance. The use of discretionary grading exacerbates anxiety felt by students who, due to their circumstances, do not have an equal opportunity to succeed. This small change would prove very effective in alleviating students’ concerns without requiring major structural changes to the Law School’s grading system.

5. Allow students to permanently select one course to be graded as “credit/no credit.” In the survey, many students indicated that being graded on a strict curve was a major source of anxiety because they struggled to perform at their academic best in the midst of the pandemic. We acknowledge that a Law School faculty committee already considered and rejected our proposal to continue a modified grading system. However, we believe that allowing students to select one course to be “credit/no credit” would alleviate some of the stress of pandemic without raising concerns among employers. This minor grading change, which is already common practice among peer schools such as NYU Law and Michigan Law, would be a practical and equitable solution for all students. 

6. Broaden exam accommodations to account for pandemic circumstances. Our current exam accommodation policy allows students to reschedule exams “in other exceptional and documented circumstances.” However, according to many survey respondents, students with exceptional circumstances due to the pandemic were unable to qualify for rescheduled exams. For example, students who contracted COVID-19 shortly before exams but were well by exam time nonetheless needed additional time to learn the weeks of material they had missed. Additionally, students who lost family members during the semester in traumatic circumstances (i.e. saying goodbye over facetime) needed significantly more time for bereavement. We ask that you broaden exam accommodations to account for problems caused throughout the semester by the pandemic.

7. Make reservable space available across the university during exams. Many students reported a lack of distraction-free studying and exam-taking space. This had a disproportionate impact on students with families and other responsibilities. Even students in campus housing reported disturbances caused by poor Wi-Fi connections, nearby schools, and construction. We request that CLS administrators work with the larger University to reserve more study spaces in unused or underutilized buildings across campus. Peer schools have also rented spaces outside the University system to provide their students with more options, and we request the Law School to explore this accommodation as well.

8. Eliminate multiple choice remote exams. Multiple choice remote exams have exacerbated concerns of cheating. Not only are these types of questions easier to cheat on, but they also make it harder to uncover cheating and hold students accountable. Additionally, some remote multiple choice exams last semester had formatting problems, which led to some questions being discounted from grading and disadvantaging students who spent time answering them. Peer schools, such as Penn Law, have eliminated remote multiple choice exams across the board, and we request that Columbia do the same.

9. Require all professors to review their exams from a student account before administration. A number of exams contained formatting errors and other problems which demonstrated that professors did not know how the tests would be displayed on students’ screens. Incorrect versions of exams were posted, professors gave incorrect information about students' ability to print exam materials, and exams were formatted in ways that were difficult to navigate during the exam. Requiring all professors to take their own exams from a student facing account will ensure they understand what the final version of their exam will look like and will enable them to seek support from technical staff before exam day if they unknowingly make errors in exam formatting. We also request professors add 10 minutes of buffer time in addition to the allocated exam time so that students have time to address internet connectivity issues and convert their answers to the right format for Electronic Bluebook without cutting into their exam time.

10. Place student representatives on all faculty committees. We request the administration place student representatives on all faculty committees and provide them with full member privileges, such as voting rights. This will address students’ concerns more comprehensively at the outset of the decision-making process. We aim to work alongside faculty, staff, and administrators to ensure that students’ perspectives are always considered in decisions that affect the student body.