Strengthening Foundational Skills in the AI Era: Three Law Schools Reform Teaching and Exam Formats
Source: Lianhe Zaobao
Article Date: 05 Aug 2026
Author: Poh Lay Hoon
The rise of generative artificial intelligence has prompted the three local law schools to review their curricula, teaching, and assessment methods, including exam formats.
This article was first published on 2 August 2026 in the Singapore Mandarin broadsheet, Lianhe Zaobao.
SLW obtained permission to reproduce the article to give the legal community a broader view of legal reports for various news syndicates.
The rise of generative artificial intelligence (AI) has prompted the three local law schools to review their curricula, teaching, and assessment methods, including exam formats. The National University of Singapore Faculty of Law (NUS Law) and the Singapore Management University Yong Pung How School of Law (YPHSL) will roll out new measures in the new academic year starting this month, while the Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS) School of Law is currently finalising relevant policies.
Starting the new academic year from 3 August, almost all first- and second-year compulsory courses at NUS Law will shift from open-book exams to semi closed-book exams. First-year students will also be banned from using legal AI tools such as Harvey. Meanwhile, starting 17 August, first day of its new academic year, YPHSL will reduce open-book exams, and phase in semi closed-book and closed-book exams, with the plan to extend them to all core law courses over two academic years. It also plans to replace some take-home exams and assignments with proctored, lockdown-browser exams.
Professor Leslie Chew, Dean of the SUSS School of Law, said the School has recently completed a review of its approaches to teaching, learning and assessment in the age of generative AI, taking reference from guidance issued by the Ministry of Law, the Courts' Practice Directions, as well as SUSS’ own policies on the responsible use of AI.
These considerations, he added, would continue to inform the evolution of the School's pedagogy, curriculum and assessment approaches to ensure students develop strong legal reasoning and analytical skills while being equipped to use AI responsibly and effectively when they enter legal practice.
Closed-book exams do not allow the use of any reference materials, while semi closed-book exams allow the use of specified reference materials. A lockdown browser restricts the opening of other webpages or applications. Take-home exams are completed by students at home within a stipulated time period.
Professor Tan Cheng Han, Chief Strategy Officer at NUS Law, observed that in current open-book exams, although they are not allowed to surf the Internet or use phones or tablets, students often bring bundles of printed materials into the exam hall. For example, when an exam question touches on directors’ duties, students tend to immediately sift through their notes.
"Sometimes students spend so much time putting together materials. But are they really reading and understanding the materials or are they simply making a compilation?" he questioned.
NUS: Not going back to rote learning
Professor Tan emphasised that the aim of the reform was not to revert to rote learning, but to reduce reliance on materials and instead focus on understanding legal principles, analysing issues, and applying the law. Simply put, students should complete exams with the knowledge in their head rather than overly relying on the bundles of reference materials brought into the exam hall. Students may be allowed to bring limited specified reference materials, such as the Companies Act and other statute books, into the exam hall, as the objective of exams remains on testing analytical ability rather than on memory.
He pointed out that if students rely on legal AI tools right from their first year, it could weaken their ability to think independently. "Why do we still ask primary school kids to learn arithmetic when everybody has a calculator or even our phones have a calculator? Why do we still need them to know what is 7 * 7? Because we still believe humans must learn to use our brain first."
He stated that even though students can use legal AI tools like Harvey, freshmen will be banned from such tools. "When you read a case, you should read it properly. We don't want students to over-simplify that initial learning process by relying on powerful legal AI tools such as Harvey," he explained.
Professor Tan cited Harvey-generated case summaries as one example where students can only have access to those aids from the second year onwards.
Professor Lee Pey Woan, Dean of YPHSL, pointed out that the School's review of teaching and assessment methods was guided by two goals: preserving the rigour of the programme, so students still build strong foundational legal skills in reasoning, research, writing, and advocacy; while also equipping them to use technology responsibly.
On exams specifically, the focus is on protecting the acquisition of foundational skills. Starting this August, YPHSL will begin phasing in semi closed-book and closed-book exams, starting with selected core courses and extending to all its core courses over two academic years.
Professor Lee said this change encourages deeper reflection, since students preparing their own notes must read the primary legal materials, synthesise, and select the core ideas themselves, a process central to developing sound legal reasoning and judgment.
SMU: compulsory “AI-resistant” activity in each core course
Furthermore, YPHSL will introduce more in-class assessments such as quizzes, oral questioning, and debates. For more advanced legal AI tools, it will train faculty first before rolling out to students next year. From 2027, every core course at YPHSL must also include at least one AI-resistant activity, exercise or assessment, requiring students to demonstrate analysis and reasoning well beyond what AI alone can produce.
Source: Lianhe Zaobao © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction.
235