Skip to Main Content

AI and Law Teaching

Discussions of AI and ChatGPT in the Legal Academy

Despite the sturm und drang over ChatGPT and AI among the legal academy and higher education more generally, most law schools do not have an official policy regarding ChatGPT and AI.  On this page, you will find advice and guidance on creating an AI policy from scholars and organizations, a summary of any policies that already exist, and an incomplete sampling of recent law school courses dealing with the topic of AI and the law.

While there are very few official policies in place in higher education and seemingly fewer in law schools, various government agencies, think tanks, policy groups, and individual scholars have put forth various pieces.  Some merely seek to identify and set forth the major issues involved and some offer guidance on creating an AI policy.

Scribbr has compiled a list on university policies on AI writing tools.  To broadly summarize their findings, the majority of schools leave the question of AI tools to individual instructors and more than a quarter appear to provide no clear guidance.

For law schools, very few appear to have an official policy.  The University of California at Berkeley has been mentioned in the news as one of the first law schools with a policy in place and it reads as follows:

Berkeley AGI Policy:  Berkeley Law Policy on the Use of Generative AI Software
 Generative AI is software, for example, ChatGPT, that can perform advanced processing of text at skill levels that at least appear similar to a human’s. Generative AI software is quickly being adopted in legal practice, and many internet services and ordinary programs will soon include generative AI software. At the same time, Generative AI presents risks to our shared pedagogical mission. For this reason, we adopt the following default rule, which enables some uses of Generative AI but also bans uses of Generative AI that would be plagiaristic if Generative AI’s output had been composed by a human author.  

The class of generative AI software:

- May be used to perform research in ways similar to search engines such as Google, for correction of grammar, and for other functions attendant to completing an assignment. The software may not be used to compose any part of the submitted assignment.

- May not be used for any purpose in any exam situation.

- Never may be employed for a use that would constitute plagiarism if the generative AI source were a human or organizational author. For discussion of plagiarism, see  https://gsi.berkeley.edu/gsi-guide-contents/academic-misconduct-intro/plagiarism/

Instructors have discretion to deviate from the default rule, provided that they do so in writing and with appropriate notice.”

Integrating AI into one's teaching techniques and being aware of its potential use and misuse in student works has become of a matter of great concern among academics, but teaching AI itself in law school is another issue fraught with pedagogical difficulties.  Various scholars have advocated for the more widespread inclusion of AI courses and here follow some examples of courses that have already been implemented.

Current and Recent Law School Course on Law and Technology.