Pre-law students push for AI transparency as law schools lag behind on GenAI policies

​A majority of pre-law students want law schools to provide clear guidance on the use of GenAI in admissions essays, according to a new survey by Kaplan.

The findings reveal 83% of respondents believe law schools should have official policies specifying whether applicants may use AI tools such as ChatGPT when writing their personal statements. However, a recent Kaplan survey of law school admissions officers found that more than half of law schools lack such policies.

Mixed opinions on AI in admissions

The survey highlights divergent views on the role of AI in the admissions process. Only 27% of pre-law students support allowing applicants to use GenAI for assistance with their essays, while 55% oppose it and 18% remain uncertain. Meanwhile, among law schools, only 1% currently allow applicants to use AI in their admissions essays.

Transparency is another major concern. Nearly 9 in 10 students (89%) believe that if law schools use AI tools to evaluate applications, they should disclose this information. In contrast, 3% believe disclosure is unnecessary, and 8% are unsure.

Concerns Over fairness and AI bias

The potential for bias in AI-assisted admissions is a key issue for many students. 80% of respondents worry that AI could unintentionally perpetuate biases, while only 9% express no concern and 12% remain undecided.

Some students also feel uneasy about applying to law schools that incorporate AI in admissions decisions. 75% say they would be more comfortable applying to institutions that do not use AI, while only 8% say it would not affect their decision.

Uncertainty in law school policies

Despite AI’s increasing role in academic and professional settings, law schools remain largely unprepared to address its impact on the admissions process. Many institutions have yet to take a stance, leaving applicants without clear guidance.

Amit Schlesinger, executive director of legal and government programs at Kaplan, advised students to be proactive when navigating AI policies:

"Most law schools don’t yet have clear policies on using Generative AI for admissions essays, but our survey finds that future applicants overwhelmingly want that to change. In our opinion, it’s becoming too significant an issue for law schools to simply leave it to prospective students’ own devices.

“Our advice to applicants is that if a school doesn’t have spelled-out rules, the safest approach is to ask an admissions official directly. When in doubt, reach out. Law schools value integrity, and demonstrating that you sought guidance shows sound judgment. It’s better to get a clear answer now than face consequences later. You don’t want your application tossed on a technicality. You’ve worked too hard for that."

The need for AI governance in admissions

The survey highlights a growing disconnect between applicants and law schools regarding AI policies. While students express concerns over fairness, transparency, and bias, institutions have yet to establish clear rules. This lack of consistency places applicants in a difficult position, forcing them to interpret AI policies, or the lack thereof, on their own.

The conversation around AI in higher education and admissions continues to evolve. Some institutions, such as Arizona State University's Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, have explicit policies permitting AI use, provided applicants disclose it. Others, like Columbia Law School, have banned AI-generated application materials entirely, warning that violations could result in rescinded offers or disciplinary action.