The Impact of ChatGPT on Legal Education: Navigating the Integration of AI in Law Schools

The advent of ChatGPT has profoundly influenced legal education in India, compelling law faculties to continuously adapt their teaching and assessment methods to maintain academic integrity. This AI tool, which emerged over eighteen months ago, has become an integral part of the legal research landscape, prompting both students and educators to rethink traditional approaches.

In Indian law schools, ChatGPT’s influence is evident in the way students engage with their assignments. A survey of law students revealed that 29% use the tool for summarizing concepts or notes, 54% for studying and clarifying concepts, and 50% for research purposes. Additionally, 47% rely on it for creating content such as emails, blogs, and project work. While 82% of students find the tool useful, concerns persist regarding its reliability, especially given its tendency to hallucinate and produce inaccurate or repetitive content.

Faculty members have responded by employing various strategies to ensure that students do not rely too heavily on AI. Tools like Turnitin have been useful in detecting plagiarism, although they sometimes falsely identify original work as AI-generated. To further address these challenges, some professors conduct viva voce exams to assess whether students have genuinely engaged with their work or have simply relied on ChatGPT.

At an international level, the use of AI tools in legal education is also gaining traction. At the University of Minnesota, an experiment was conducted where ChatGPT was asked to respond to 95 multiple-choice questions and 12 essay-based questions. The AI’s responses were mixed with those of law students, and while ChatGPT’s answers received passing grades, it scored below average with a C+. This experiment, which spanned multiple subjects, suggested that with consistent performance, ChatGPT could even pass the JD exam. This finding underscores the potential of AI tools in legal education but also highlights the limitations in their current form.

Similarly, at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, a professor argued against banning ChatGPT, advocating instead for educating students on when and how to appropriately rely on the tool. A colleague from the University of Michigan suggested that integrating ChatGPT into law schools could encourage students to improve their legal writing skills. To prevent over-reliance on the tool during exams, this professor designs questions that focus more on classroom teachings and avoids generic questions that could be easily answered by AI.

In Australia, the development of a specialized AI tool called Australia Law School SuperGPT has taken AI integration a step further. This tool assists students with a range of tasks, including reviewing and drafting documents, as well as understanding and applying complex legal principles and doctrines. Initially, Australian law schools were hesitant to embrace ChatGPT, but with the government’s involvement, a framework was developed for the responsible use of emerging technologies in education. This framework was created in consultation with a national AI schools task force, education unions, experts, and other key stakeholders.

Law professors in India, such as Krishna Deo Singh Chauhan of Jindal Global Law School and Aman Gupta of West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences, emphasize the importance of using AI tools like ChatGPT as aids rather than substitutes for rigorous academic work. While Chauhan acknowledges that integrating ChatGPT into the curriculum may not yet be feasible, he recognizes that law schools cannot ignore its presence. Gupta, on the other hand, has already started incorporating AI-generated content into assignments, requiring students to critically analyze and improve upon it.

Nikhil Naren, an Assistant Professor at Jindal Global Law School, is a strong advocate for incorporating AI tools into the curriculum. He believes that understanding technologies like ChatGPT is crucial for future legal professionals. Naren employs innovative teaching methods, such as giving students legal factual situations and asking them to use ChatGPT for initial analysis, followed by a critical review of the AI’s output. This approach not only encourages the use of AI but also fosters critical thinking and a deeper understanding of the law.

In conclusion, while ChatGPT and similar AI tools have made significant inroads into legal education both in India and internationally, it is crucial to approach their integration with caution. These tools can enhance efficiency and serve as valuable aids in legal research and learning. However, they must be used responsibly, with an emphasis on originality, critical analysis, and the ethical implications of relying on AI. As the legal profession continues to evolve in the digital age, both students and educators must strike a balance between embracing technological advancements and upholding the fundamental principles of legal education.

~Laksh(Trainee)