UCLA's law school has come under scrutiny following the revelation that approximately 25% of its students received extended time on exams through disability accommodations during the 2024-25 academic year. Public records obtained by The California Post indicate that 323 out of 1,374 law students were granted extra time, a figure that has raised concerns about the integrity of the accommodation system.
Recent graduate Andrew Gomez-Blumenfeld, who obtained the records, argues that the system may be exploited by students seeking a competitive edge. While accommodations like assistive technology and note-takers are available, the data shows that extended testing time was overwhelmingly the most requested and granted accommodation. All but 12 students received this benefit, with some granted up to 150% additional time on their exams.
"You would imagine in a sort of ideal world where people were getting accommodations to meet their disabilities, that you’d see a sort of interesting diversity and distribution of the kinds of accommodations that people need," Gomez-Blumenfeld stated. He first noticed disparities during his three years at UCLA Law when fewer students were present for exams than attended classes.
In the 2024-25 academic year, the majority of students receiving extra time, 204, were granted 50% more time. Another 44 students received 100% extra time, and four were given 150% extra time. These extensions can add significant time to high-pressure law school exams, which can already last three to four hours, potentially impacting performance on the strictly curved grading system.
The records also indicated that nearly all of these extra-time accommodations were awarded to students in the Juris Doctor program, with very few going to those in the Master of Laws or Master of Studies in Law programs. The California Post has reached out to UCLA Law for comment.
This trend is not isolated to UCLA. Educators across California and the nation have reported a sharp increase in disability accommodation requests, particularly those related to mental health conditions. Data from UC Berkeley's law school, for instance, showed 378 students claiming a "psychological" or other mental disability, about a third of its enrollment, a dramatic rise from just 3% five years prior.
While some academics suggest this growth undermines confidence in exam fairness, disability advocates maintain that accommodations are crucial for ensuring equal access for students with legitimate medical conditions. However, critics like George Leef of the James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal have questioned the fairness of exams when a significant portion of students test under different conditions, particularly given the socioeconomic backgrounds often associated with law school students.