Multiple validity studies have shown that JD-Next test scores are strong predictors of law school grades and can provide a significant increase over existing admissions tools in the ability to predict law school academic performance.

The JD-Next final examination produces little to no score disparities for under-represented groups while also increasing students' law school GPA by .20 points.

Here are multiple studies and reports regarding these findings:

JD‐Next: A valid and reliable tool to predict diverse students' success in law school - Findley - 2023 - Journal of Empirical Legal Studies - Wiley Online Library

Abstract: Admissions tests have increasingly come under attack by those seeking to broaden access and reduce disparities in higher education. Meanwhile, in other sectors there is a movement towards "work-sample" or "proximal" testing. Especially for underrepresented students, the goal is to measure not just the accumulated knowledge and skills that they would bring to a new academic program, but also their ability to grow and learn through the program. The JD-Next is a fully online, noncredit, 7- to 10-week course to train potential JD students in case reading and analysis skills, prior to their first year of law school. This study tests the validity and reliability of the JD-Next exam as a potential admissions tool for juris doctor programs of education. (In a companion article, we report on the efficacy of the course for preparing students for law school.) In 2019, we recruited a national sample of potential JD students, enriched for racial/ethnic diversity, along with a sample of volunteers at one university (N = 62). In 2020, we partnered with 17 law schools around the country to recruit a cohort of their incoming law students (N = 238). At the end of the course, students were incentivized to take and perform well on an exam that we graded with a standardized methodology. We collected first-semester grades as an outcome variable, and compared JD-Next exam properties to legacy exams now used by law schools (the Law School Admissions Test (LSAT), including converted GRE scores). We found that the JD-Next exam was a valid and reliable predictor of law school performance, comparable to legacy exams. For schools ranked outside the Top 50, we found that the legacy exams lacked significant incremental validity in our sample, but the JD-Next exam provided a significant advantage. We also replicated known, substantial racial and ethnic disparities on the legacy exam scores, but estimate smaller, nonsignificant score disparities on the JD-Next exam. Together this research suggests that, as an admissions tool, the JD-Next exam may reduce the risk that capable students will be excluded from legal education and the legal profession.

JD-next: A Randomized Experiment of an Online Scalable Program to Prepare Diverse Students for Law School 71 Journal of Legal Education 2021-2022 (heinonline.org)

Abstract: Imagine starting a medical degree without having studied science as an undergraduate. Without having exposure to the basic content, how can potential students be confident that they are on the right academic path? Without training in the specific skills needed, how can they succeed on that path? In the health professions, graduate programs of education have solutions to these problems. Before matriculating as medical students, applicants are typically required to take a relevant curriculum, including courses like organic chemistry and biology, as undergraduates. If they graduate without doing so, and later choose to go to medical school, they can take a "post-baccalaureate" program to fill in the gaps and demonstrate their ability to learn such material. In contrast, for law, the juris doctorate (JD) has no particular curriculum as a prerequisite and lacks a systematic approach to exposing potential students to the skills and methods of legal education. Matriculants thus arrive to JD programs with widely varying preparations, some having studied chemistry as undergraduates, others having studied economics or literature. Few have learned the skills of case reading and analysis, which will be needed on the first day of law school. Of course, some students will have advantages-for example, if they have attorneys or other highly educated professionals in their families. Some may even spend money and time to take expensive preparation courses. But these advantages can just exacerbate disparities. The American JD also lacks a systematic approach to preparing diverse populations to succeed in the study of law. Moreover, the field lacks systematic and valid measures of prospective students' ability to learn legal skills from cases, as in law school classes.

Validity, Reliability, and Fairness Evidence for the JD‐Next Exam - Holtzman - ETS Research Report Series - Wiley Online Library

Abstract: At a time when institutions of higher education are exploring alternatives to traditional admissions testing, institutions are also seeking to better support students and prepare them for academic success. Under such an engaged model, one may seek to measure not just the accumulated knowledge and skills that students would bring to a new academic program but also their ability to grow and learn through the academic program. To help prepare students for law school before they matriculate, the JD-Next is a fully online, noncredit, 7- to 10-week course to train potential juris doctor students in case reading and analysis skills. This study builds on the work presented for previous JD-Next cohorts by introducing new scoring and reliability estimation methodologies based on a recent redesign of the assessment for the 2021 cohort, and it presents updated validity and fairness findings using first-year grades, rather than merely first-semester grades as in prior cohorts. Results support the claim that the JD-Next exam is reliable and valid for predicting law school success, providing a statistically significant increase in predictive power over baseline models, including entrance exam scores and grade point averages. In terms of fairness across racial and ethnic groups, smaller score disparities are found with JD-Next than with traditional admissions assessments, and the assessment is shown to be equally predictive for students from underrepresented minority groups and for first-generation students. These findings, in conjunction with those from previous research, support the use of the JD-Next exam for both preparing and admitting future law school students.

The Association of Participating in a Summer Prelaw Training Program and First-Year Law School Students' Grades

Abstract: This study estimates the association of participation in a nine-week online educational program to prepare students for post-graduate (juris doctorate) education and law school grades. We collected registrar data from 17 U.S. law schools for participants and non-participants from the same year and a prior year. We compared first-semester law school grades between participating and non-participating students weighted by propensity scores. Course participation was associated with improved first-semester grades in a keyed course (Contracts Law) and overall grade point average. According to pre- and post-survey responses, a substantial portion of those who completed the program reported feeling more prepared for law school.

California Association of Black Lawyers

Abstract: We urge the Council to accept the JD-Next exam as a third admissions test satisfying the mandate of Standard 503, consistent with Dr. Nathan Kuncel's conclusion that JD-Next is a valid and reliable test, as Standard 503 requires. We also ask that you adjust school disclosure requirements to apply only to the test scores that schools rely upon. Nationally, ABA data shows that while Black people are 13.4% of the United States population, only 8.3% of students in ABA accredited law schools are Black. We have a long way to go to achieve equity in law school admissions! We believe JD Next can improve the number of African American lawyers in the profession in the near future. This is the mission of the California Association of Black Lawyers and we are committed to increasing diversity in the profession. In a recent article, Aaron Taylor (Executive Director of AccessLex Center for Legal Education Excellence), explains that, "the manner in which the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) drives the vetting of law school applications ensures that Black applicants face steep disadvantages in gaining admission. To maximize their rankings, law schools use the racially-disparate test not only for admissions decisions but also to award "merit-based" financial aid, which means heavy debt loads for Black students as well.