Errors happen. And making amends usually involves trying to revert situations back to how they should have panned out if done correctly. However, trying to fix matters can still arouse frustration—especially when it involves law school transcripts. From this perspective emerges a recent case at the University of Toledo College of Law.
Two students have filed a complaint with the American Bar Association (ABA) against the University for a grading error that majorly affected the students in a fall 2023 legal ethics course taught by professor Llewellyn Gibbons. The error was brought to light by an explanatory email from the interim Dean of Toledo Law, Rebecca Zietlow. According to her, Gibbons “discovered a large-scale error in the entered grades for the course, likely arising due to a record keeping/data entry problem.”
Following the revelation of their grades, students made decisions commensurate with these outcomes; some dropped the class in favor of another, while others, who initially believed they had passed, discovered they had to retake the class due to their actual grades being inadequate. Understandably, students are not content and have evinced suspicion about their updated grades.
In the absence of an explicit explanation about how the updated grades were determined, especially given the loss of the laptop that contained the original grading information, many remain skeptical about the accuracy of these new grades. Furthermore, a reported issue related to “mismatched” IDs has compounded this concern even further.
Perspectives expressed on Ratemyprofessor reveal ongoing dissatisfaction concerning the grading discrepancy. In the face of this considerable blemish on what should be an otherwise exceptional academic record, it appears that Professor Gibbons has a precedented history of “organizational errors” dating as far back as 2007, raising further question marks around the current grading situation and his overall teaching competence.
While mishaps occur, recurring patterns, particularly over significant periods, can raise questions about the efficacy of processes and the persons involved. The recent episode involving Professor Gibbons is waiting to be addressed, but one thing is certain: these students’ trust in their grading system and the professor’s competency has been tested, and they demand improved and standardized policies for grading procedures and oversight for future law students.
In the broader context of legal education, especially for global corporations and law firms, this points to the crucial importance of accurate, reliable, and transparent grading systems. After all, it’s not only about the grades. It’s about the credibility, ethical conduct, and trust-building these grades represent in the cut-throat world of legal practice.