Learning Outcomes Database

This database contains a searchable list of all law school learning outcomes that were available on law school websites as of October 2026.

We have identified those law schools with “basic” learning outcomes – those that recite the language of Standard 302 and nothing more. We also have identified those law schools with more robust learning outcomes than required by the language of Standard 302.

Standard Learning Outcomes

Standard 302(a) Learning Outcomes

This page contains language of law school learning outcomes associated with Standard 302(a) – competency in (a) Knowledge and understanding of substantive and procedural law.

See Standard 302(a)

Standard 302(b) Learning Outcomes

This page contains language of law school learning outcomes associated with Standard 302(b) and (d) – competency in (b) Legal analysis and reasoning, legal research, problem-solving, and written and oral communication in the legal context; and (d) Other professional skills needed for competent and ethical participation as a member of the legal profession. This includes some “other professional skills” to the extent they are associated with communication and problem-solving, such as client interviewing, fact investigation, document drafting, negotiation, trial advocacy, etc.

See Standard 302(b)

Standard 302(c) Learning Outcomes

This page contains language of law school learning outcomes associated with Standards 302(c) and (d) – competency in (c) Exercise of proper professional and ethical responsibilities to clients and the legal system; and (d) Other professional skills needed for competent and ethical participation as a member of the legal profession. This includes some “other professional skills” associated with professional and ethical responsibilities such as cultural competence, integrity, diligence, self-directedness, teamwork, etc.

See Standard 302(c)

Learning Outcomes by Law School (PDF)

Most Common Learning Outcomes: Technical Skills

Most common learning outcomes law schools are adopting on technical skills and capacities beyond the Standard 302 (a)-(d) minimum requirements (including all outcomes adopted by ten or more schools) (presented in descending order of frequency).

Learning Outcome	Number of Law Schools (191)
Issue-Spotting	71 Schools (37%)
Document Drafting	60 Schools (31%)
Investigating Facts	58 Schools (30%)
Understanding Legal Policy and Trends	57 Schools (30%)
Public Speaking/Oral Argument	52 Schools (27%)
Understanding the Legal System	51 Schools (27%)
Identify Authority	51 Schools (27%)
Time Management/Planning	49 Schools (26%)
Analogize/Synthesize/Distinguish	48 Schools (25%)
Precise Language	37 Schools (19%)
Advocacy	36 Schools (19%)
Online Research/Technology	35 Schools (18%)
Policy Arguments	29 Schools (15%)
Knowledge of a Specialty Area	25 Schools (13%)
Citation Format	10 Schools (5%)

Most Common Learning Outcomes: Relational Skills

Most common learning outcomes law schools are adopting on relational and virtue-oriented skills and capacities beyond the Standard 302 (b)-(d) minimum requirements (including all outcomes adopted by ten or more schools) (presented in descending order of frequency).

We included in professionalism all learning outcomes concerning the core values and guiding principles of the profession beyond the minimum of learning the law of lawyering.

We included in cultural competence all learning outcomes that mentioned the capacities and skills of working with others of diverse backgrounds.

We included in self-directedness all learning outcomes concerning ownership of a student's own professional development. While broken apart in the chart below, self-directedness includes the sub-competencies of seeking feedback and reflection on experiences.

Learning Outcome	Number of Law Schools (191)
Persuasion/Knowing Audience	76 Schools (40%)
Cultural Competence	75 Schools (39%)
Professionalism	66 Schools (35%)
Teamwork/Collaboration	64 Schools (34%)
Pro Bono	63 Schools (33%)
Self-Directedness	52 Schools (27%)
Negotiation	44 Schools (23%)
Reflection/Self-Evaluation	44 Schools (23%)
Counseling	43 Schools (23%)
Improving the Profession	42 Schools (22%)
Judgment	37 Schools (20%)
Client Interviewing	37 Schools (19%)
Respect for Others	35 Schools (18%)
Client-Centered	31 Schools (16%)
Active Listening	31 Schools (16%)
Integrity	30 Schools (16%)
Mediation/Conflict Resolution	29 Schools (15%)
Leadership	18 Schools (9%)
Diligence	16 Schools (8%)
Self-care	14 Schools (7%)
Actively Seeking Feedback	11 Schools (6%)

Criteria for Database Inclusion

The database does not include the JAG School or any of the three Puerto Rican law schools. It also excludes the following law schools that have lost ABA accreditation or have phased out or are phasing out of operation since the first iteration of the Learning Outcomes Databases: Arizona Summit, Florida Coastal, Golden Gate, Indiana Tech, LaVerne, Thomas Jefferson, Valparaiso, and Whittier. It takes into account the recent merger between Penn State Law and Penn State Dickinson Law, as well as the addition of High Point University, Jacksonville University, and Wilmington University.

With the above adjustments, there are 192 ABA accredited law schools that should have posted learning outcomes. We have found learning outcomes for 191 of these schools; we were unable to find learning outcomes for the College of William and Mary. Several other schools include learning outcomes in an archived page or bulletin; we have retained the most recent iteration. Other schools seem to have unpublished their learning outcomes. While this is noted in the PDF, we are retaining these schools in the database to allow for the possibility that they are working on updates. We will remove them in the 2027 update cycle if the information is still unavailable on a live webpage.

Some schools list learning outcomes that do not clearly state a competency that all students will demonstrate. For example, some schools have statements that students will demonstrate some skills from a list of skills using language like “such as [and a list of skills}” or “which may include [and a list of skills].” This language does not guarantee a graduate will obtain any specific skill. Accordingly, these statements have not been included as a learning outcome.

A newly added category, Client-Centered Problem Solving, reflects learning outcomes with a principled focus of client attentiveness with respect to problem solving. To be included in this learning outcome list, the school had to adopt language going significantly beyond simple problem solving to include a message strongly reflecting a client focus.