By the authority of Administrative Order 99-08, the Arizona Supreme Court adopted Educational Policies and Standards to govern the education of the judicial branch. Listed below are the sections of the Educational Policies and Standards. You can view the authorizing order by using this link.

The protection of the rights of free citizens depends upon the existence of an independent and competent judiciary. The task of maintaining judicial independence depends to a large extent upon public understanding of the judicial system and the role of judges in applying a constantly changing body of law to the resolution of everyday problems in a complex society. The failure to create such public understanding can lead to the loss of public confidence in and respect for the judiciary.

The task of maintaining judicial competence, on the other hand, depends more on the willingness of the judiciary itself to assure that its members are knowledgeable and skilled in the study of the law and its development, and that judges are trained in the application of legal principles and the art of judging. The personnel employed within the judicial system must also maintain a high level of competence to assist judges in carrying out their responsibilities and to provide accurate and timely services to the public.

To the end that judicial independence and competence might be preserved and reinforced as essential elements of our system of government, the Arizona Supreme Court established an educational system for all judges and employees of the Arizona judicial department in November 1983 (Administrative Order 83-10). The Supreme Court also created the Council on Judicial Education and Training to assist the Supreme Court in developing and implementing educational policies and, in a series of orders recommended by the Council, the court adopted educational standards for judges, probation and court personnel in all levels of the judicial system (Administrative Orders 85-2, 85-29, and 85-30).

In late 1986, the Council recommended several major changes in the Court's educational policies and standards in order to improve the quality of educational programs being conducted throughout the state. The Court approved these changes in January 1987, and adopted a single administrative order changing and consolidating all previous orders as of July 1, 1987 (Administrative Order 87-4). The Court's educational policies and standards were further refined by Administrative Order 89-2.

In early 1990, the Supreme Court created the Arizona Judicial Council to assist the Court in the development and implementation of policies for the integrated judicial department. The Court also determined that the Council on Judicial Education and Training would become a standing committee of the Arizona Judicial Council and entered Administrative Order No. 90-28 to reflect this and to rename the Council on Judicial Education and Training the "Committee on Judicial Education and Training" (COJET). Administrative Order 91-1 confirmed the membership of COJET. Administrative Order 91-9 made attendance at the Supreme Court's orientation for new general jurisdiction judges mandatory for all newly elected or appointed Superior Court Judges.

Administrative Order No. 93-19 enlarged COJET to include the Dean of the newly formed Judicial College of Arizona. Also, in 1993 Administrative Order 93-59 changed education requirements for appellate court judges. In 1995 Administrative Order No. 95-45, altered the definition of orientation for judicial staff, redefined continuing education for judicial staff, and expanded COJET to include the Dean of Probation Officer Certification. In 1996 Administrative Order 96-16 clarified the education and training mandate for judicial staff. In 1997, Administrative Order 97-40 expanded COJET to include all deans/chairs of formal COJET subcommittees; recommended suggestions to faculty to include principles of adult learning; and allowed up to two (2) hours of COJET credit for participation in an "overview" of required curriculum by all non-judge, non-probation officer employees. In 1999, the administrative order was revised to include training and education requirements for general jurisdiction judges new to hearing dependency cases, limited jurisdiction hearing officers and judges pro tempore of both the limited and general jurisdiction courts.

All of the Court's educational policies and standards are contained in this document. As part of the Court's order, copies of these policies and standards shall be distributed to all judges, court administrators, clerks of the court, chief adult probation officers, juvenile court directors, and other interested persons.

1. Supreme Court


The Supreme Court is the administrative authority for the integrated judicial department in Arizona. In this capacity, the Court is responsible for providing the leadership and guidance needed to maintain judicial competence throughout the state court system.
2. Committee on Judicial Education and Training (COJET)



1. Purpose. COJET assists the Supreme Court in developing educational policies and standards for the court system, and is responsible for monitoring the quality of educational programs, recommending changes in policies and standards, and approving guidelines for accrediting training programs.
2. Membership. COJET is comprised of the following members: a supreme court justice or a court of appeals judge; two judges from the superior court, one representing urban courts, the other representing rural courts; one justice court judge and one municipal court judge, one to be a lawyer, the other to be a non-lawyer; the administrative director of the courts or the deputy director; a trial court administrator; a chief adult probation officer and a juvenile court director, one of whom must be from an urban court and the other from a rural court; a superior court clerk; a limited jurisdiction court clerk; the deans of the state's two law schools or their designees; a judicial secretary; a court reporter; the chair/s deans of all formal COJET subcommittees; and, such other members as may be appointed at the discretion of the Chief Justice.
3. Terms of Members. COJET members shall be appointed by the Chief Justice for three-year terms. Terms shall be staggered so that approximately one-third of COJET shall be subject to replacement or reappointment each year. The chairperson may recommend to the Chief Justice that a member be replaced on COJET if absent from two consecutive meetings or if a member fails to meet the responsibilities of membership as outlined in Section B.2.d.
4. Responsibilities of Members. COJET members shall participate in the delivery or development of educational programs and serve as an evaluator each year for the purpose of monitoring the effectiveness of educational policies and standards. COJET members shall also participate in faculty development programs and shall be advocates for continuing education for judges and members of the judicial community.
5. Organization. The Chief Justice may appoint a chairperson and additional officers as needed to organize COJET. Advisory committees to help COJET carry out its responsibilities may be appointed by the chairperson with the approval of the Chief Justice.
6. Meetings. COJET shall meet no less than twice a year. Additional meetings may be called at the discretion of the chairperson or upon majority vote of COJET. All meetings shall be noticed and open to the public.
7. Actions. COJET shall adopt rules for conducting COJET business. These rules shall prescribe the quorum and majority needed to constitute COJET actions.
3. Administrative Office of the Courts



1. Administrative Director. Under the direction of the Supreme Court, the Administrative Director of the Courts shall prepare guidelines for the implementation of the standards, and shall develop, administer, and coordinate judicial education programs throughout the state. The director shall be assisted in this effort by the staff of the Education Services Division of the Administrative Office of the Courts. The director shall inform all judges and court employees of the Court's educational policies and standards and shall notify judges that both orientation, before or within twelve months after appointment or election, and continuing judicial education are necessary in order to obtain and maintain professional competence. The director shall also provide state and local governments and courts with information concerning judicial education in order to bring about recognition of the need to support judicial education.
2. Education Services Division. The Education Services Division shall prepare and implement an annual judicial education plan, coordinate all judicial education programs, staff COJET and its formal subcommittee meetings, conduct faculty development programs, evaluate educational programs, provide guidance to judges and judicial employees in the selection of appropriate educational opportunities, develop a network of trainers throughout the courts, and prepare an annual report on educational activities in the courts.
4. Faculty



1. Basic Approach. Education and training programs shall emphasize the use of modern adult education principles that focus on participative learning. Faculty members should be familiar with effective teaching techniques based on these principles.
2. Faculty Development. To the extent permitted by available resources, faculty members should receive instruction in adult education methods and assistance in preparing presentations and materials prior to teaching in a court-sponsored program.
3. Qualifications. The education faculty should consist primarily of judges, members of the legal community, and court personnel who have expertise in the curriculum, knowledge of adult education principles, and the ability to prepare and present educational material effectively. Authorities from other disciplines should be used when their expertise will contribute to the goals of a specific program.

Faculty members are encouraged to use the following minimum adult education principles in their presentations:

1. Creating a dialog with participants by encouraging their input concerning substantive areas;
2. Asking participants questions to evaluate their comprehension and learning; and
3. Incorporating activities by participants so they can put information learned to use in the classroom setting.

1. Program Requirements

Appellate court judges shall receive orientation, if applicable, and shall complete a minimum of sixteen hours of approved course work each year, including ethics training.
2. Participant's Responsibilities

Appellate court judges should obtain and maintain professional competence through judicial education, spend such time as may reasonably be required to accomplish that purpose, support and assist other judges who may be attending judicial education programs as participants or as faculty, and, when reasonably able to do so, teach in judicial or legal education programs. In addition, appellate judges shall report compliance with the standards by completing the reporting requirements described in Section J.
3. Curriculum Standards

1. Judicial education should address the areas of judicial competence, performance, case management, opinion writing, and administration.
2. Judicial education programs should impart knowledge; improve skills and techniques; and increase the understanding of judges regarding their responsibilities and their impact on the judicial process, the people involved, and society.
3. Judicial education programs should include:

1. Orientation before or within twelve months after taking office.
2. Education for new judges on major legal subjects and practical skills needed by them and appropriate to the jurisdiction of the court in which they serve.
3. Periodic educational offerings for all judges on the substantive, procedural, and evidentiary laws of Arizona, the ethics of the profession, United States constitutional law, and applicable federal law.
4. Continuing education programs emphasizing new developments in the law and judicial administration, procedural and technological developments, in the judicial system, opinion writing, and other programs to enhance the efficiency, abilities, and knowledge of each judge.
5. Advanced and specialized programs.
6. Independent learning opportunities for judges including bench books, video and audio tapes, and other methods of independent learning.

4. Orientation

Before assuming office, or within twelve months after appointment, an experienced judge of the court in which a new appellate judge will sit shall provide an orientation on procedures and functions of that court and procedural and substantive law applicable to it.
5. Continuing Education

Appellate judges may attend a combination of approved local, regional, or national programs; however, attendance at an annual judicial conference is mandatory. At least every three years, in satisfaction of these requirements, a judge should attend a program of regional or national scope. At least every second year, the chief judges of the Courts of Appeals, in satisfaction of these requirements, should attend the annual seminar or meeting of the Council of Chief Judges of Courts of Appeals.

1. Program Requirements

Superior court judges shall receive orientation, and shall complete a minimum of sixteen hours of approved course work each year, including ethics training.
2. Participant's Responsibilities

Superior court judges should obtain and maintain professional competence through judicial education, spend such time as may reasonably be required to accomplish that purpose, and support and assist other judges who may be attending judicial education programs as participants or faculty and, when reasonably able to do so, teach in judicial or legal education programs. In addition, superior court judges shall report compliance with the standards by completing the reporting requirements described in Section J.
3. Curriculum Standards



1. Judicial education should address the areas of judicial competence, performance, case management, opinion writing, and administration.
2. Judicial education programs should impart knowledge; improve skills and techniques; and increase the understanding of judges regarding their responsibilities and their impact on the judicial process, the people involved, and society.
3. Judicial education programs should include:

1. Orientation before or within twelve months after taking office.
2. Education for new judges on major legal subjects and practical skills needed by them and appropriate to the jurisdiction of the court in which they serve.
3. Periodic educational offerings for all judges on the substantive, procedural, and evidentiary laws of Arizona, the ethics of the profession, United States constitutional law, and applicable federal law.
4. Continuing education programs emphasizing new developments in the law and judicial administration, procedural and technological developments in the judicial system, opinion writing, and other programs to enhance the efficiency, abilities, and knowledge of each judge.
5. Advanced and specialized programs.
6. Independent learning opportunities for judges including bench books, video and audio tapes, and other methods of independent learning.

4. Orientation

Before assuming office, or within the first twelve months of assuming office, a new superior court judge shall receive orientation by an experienced judge of the superior court and shall complete the orientation requirements for judges of general jurisdiction courts approved by COJET. Such orientations shall include procedures and functions of the superior court and procedural and substantive law applicable to it.

Within twelve months of assuming office, a judge may attend a general jurisdiction course at an approved residential program, such as the National Judicial College.

In general, when a superior court judge assumes a new assignment in a specialized division, the presiding judge of the court shall determine if the judge needs to attend an appropriate education program before assuming the new assignment. However, before a judge assumes a new assignment that involves dependency cases, or within the first twelve months of assuming the assignment, the judge shall complete the specialized dependency training program approved by COJET.

5. Continuing Education

Superior court judges may attend a combination of approved, local, regional, or national programs; however, attendance at an annual judicial conference is mandatory.
6. Definition

The term judge in this section includes a judge, commissioner, or referee employed on a permanent basis.
7. Judges Pro Tempore

Judges pro tempore are officers of the court and have all of the duties and responsibilities of a judge. Proper orientation and continuing education assure that judges pro tempore are provided with information, process descriptions and procedures necessary to fulfill their judicial role. Judges pro tempore shall be subject to the following requirements:

Full-Time Judge Pro Tempore: Before assuming duties, or within the first twelve months of assuming duties, a superior court judge pro tempore appointed to serve full-time for the full term allowed by statute shall complete new judge orientation requirements for superior court judges approved by COJET. Full-time judges pro tempore shall also comply with COJET continuing education requirements.

Part-Time Judge Pro Tempore: Before assuming duties, or within the first twelve months of assuming duties, a superior court judge pro tempore appointed to serve less than full-time but serve repeatedly on a regularly scheduled basis shall complete a specialized training program approved by COJET and may be required to complete other training deemed appropriate by the presiding judge of the court.

On-Call Judge Pro Tempore: A superior court judge pro tempore who serves only once or only sporadically shall complete training deemed appropriate by the presiding judge of the court.

1. Program Requirements

Judges of courts of limited jurisdiction shall receive orientation and shall complete a minimum of sixteen hours of approved course work each year, including ethics training.
2. Participant's Responsibilities

Judges should obtain and maintain professional competence through judicial education, spend such time as may reasonably be required to accomplish that purpose, and support and assist other judges who may be attending judicial education programs as participants or faculty and, when reasonably able to do so, teach in judicial or legal education programs. In addition, judges of courts of limited jurisdiction shall report compliance with the standards by completing the reporting requirements described in Section J.
3. Curriculum Standards



1. Judicial education should address the areas of judicial competence, performance, case management, opinion writing, and administration.
2. Judicial education programs should impart knowledge; improve skills and techniques; and increase the understanding of judges regarding their responsibilities and their impact on the judicial process, the people involved, and society.
3. Judicial education programs should include:

1. Orientation before or within twelve months of taking office.
2. Education for new judges on major legal subjects and practical skills needed by them and appropriate to the jurisdiction of the court in which they serve.
3. Periodic educational offerings for all judges on the substantive, procedural, and evidentiary laws of Arizona, the ethics of the profession, United States constitutional law, and applicable federal law.
4. Continuing education programs emphasizing new developments in the law and judicial administration, procedural and technological developments in the judicial system, opinion writing, and other programs to enhance the efficiency, abilities, and knowledge of each judge.
5. Advanced and specialized programs.
6. Independent learning opportunities for judges including bench books, video and audio tapes, and other methods of independent learning.

4. Orientation

Before assuming office, or within the first twelve months of assuming office, a new limited jurisdiction court judge shall participate in orientation by an experienced judge of a limited jurisdiction court and shall complete the orientation requirements for judges of courts of limited jurisdiction approved by COJET. Such orientations shall include procedures and functions of that court and procedural and substantive law applicable to it.

Within twelve months of assuming office, a judge may attend a limited jurisdiction course at an approved residential program, such as the National Judicial College.

5. Continuing Education

Judges may attend a combination of approved local, regional, or national programs; however, attendance at an annual judicial conference is mandatory.
6. Judges Pro Tempore

Judges pro tempore are officers of the court and have all of the duties and responsibilities of a judge. Proper orientation and continuing education assure that judges pro tempore are provided with information, process descriptions and procedures necessary to fulfill their judicial role. Judges pro tempore shall be subject to the following requirements:

Each Judge Pro Tempore: Before assuming duties, a limited jurisdiction judge pro tempore shall receive orientation by an experienced judge of a limited jurisdiction court and shall complete a specialized training program approved by COJET. This portion of the requirement may be waived only by the presiding judge of the superior court in the respective county.

Full-Time Judge Pro Tempore: Before assuming duties, or within twelve months of assuming duties, a limited jurisdiction court judge pro tempore who serves full time shall complete the requirements of new judge orientation for limited jurisdiction judges approved by COJET. Full-time judges pro tempore shall also comply with COJET continuing education requirements.

Part-Time and On-Call Judges Pro Tempore: Before assuming duties, a limited jurisdiction court judge pro tempore who serves less than full-time or who serves on an on-call basis may be required to complete other training deemed appropriate by the presiding judge of the superior court in the respective county.

A judge pro tempore in a limited jurisdiction court shall sign an affidavit verifying completion of the required training. The local court shall submit the affidavit to the presiding judge of the superior court in the respective county.