The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Widener professor responds to blog comments on participation
Poast new message in this thread
Date: October 7th, 2006 12:16 AM Author: internet-worthy dingle berry http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2006/10/the_virtues_of_.html (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6742733) |
 |
Date: October 7th, 2006 12:34 AM Author: glittery orange police squad sup dude. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6742828) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 12:38 AM Author: glittery orange police squad It must suck to teach at widener. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6742846) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 12:41 AM Author: flickering hairraiser roommate foreskin Man, how did this guy get to be a lawyer? He cannot acknowledge the merits of the opposition's argument and address it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6742859) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 12:44 AM Author: citrine haunting ticket booth If he was a good lawyer he probably wouldn't be teaching at Widener. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6742877) |
Date: October 7th, 2006 12:35 AM Author: citrine haunting ticket booth When did Widener get computers? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6742834) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 12:42 AM Author: appetizing maroon haunted graveyard orchestra pit I'd be pissed if I had to deal Widener students, too. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6742866) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:30 AM Author: aphrodisiac masturbator he basically says as much on his blog. i wonder how i'd feel if professors paid by my tuition posted on their personal blogs that the students at our school were "less than stellar." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743232) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:59 AM Author: internet-worthy dingle berry Yeah, I truly can't believe he posted something like this:
"Classroom rigor serves two functions in this regard: First, it increases the possibility that the worst students will give up or be dismissed, leaving the pool of graduates with more average talent, skills, and commitment. Second, it is a lesson in professionalism, encouraging students who would otherwise slack off to expend the effort necessary to learn. (Yes, this is paternalistic, but laissez faire is not enough when the quality of students is less than stellar. There is a market failure in that too many of the "consumers" -- notably anonymous law student -- do not know what is good for them. And yes, we do.) We as a school -- the good students and the professors -- cannot afford the hit that our reputation takes due to the post-graduate performance of a substantial portion of our students." |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:02 AM Author: glittery orange police squad "We as a school -- the good students and the professors -- cannot afford the hit that our reputation takes due to the post-graduate performance of a substantial portion of our students."
the funny thing is that the guy has causality messed up badly. If the school takes a hit, its because of the pre-matriculation performance of the students it accepts...
|
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 3:42 AM Author: aphrodisiac masturbator it's hard to say. it's all a big circle; the best students go to the school that offers the best job opportunities and bar passage rates, but the best job opportunities and bar passage rates go to the school that gets the best students. hard to say which way causality runs. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743750) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:09 PM Author: glittery orange police squad thats true.
although it was probably more true when the top schools were first opening their doors...it is a feedback loop.
chicken egg problem. a school like widner can't attract top students because they can't get top jobs, and graduates can't get top jobs because they don't attract top students. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:26 PM Author: Godawful Mind-boggling Meetinghouse But one clear way to improve a school's reputation/placement is the way their graduates are viewed by employers. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6744557) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:31 PM Author: glittery orange police squad of course.
i think its naive to think class participation has a significant effect on that though. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:04 AM Author: glittery orange police squad on one hand he has a point - its pretty obnoxious for a student to respond that way in class, it does bring down the level of the class, and probably annoys the 'better' students.
but of course its probably not good to post as much on the internets. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:09 AM Author: Sienna brunch halford who gives a shit. the prof is a jackass who refuses to acknowledge that no one goes to law school for an education or to learn the law. as far as I am concerned law professors and their antics ought to be a completely optional part of law school.
I even "took" a semester of law school in new york while I was living in DC. Professors who penalize students for missing or not being prepared for class are just engaged in their own ego trip--as far as learning goes they might as well penalize students for not using rainbow highlighting or having an up to date outline. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:10 AM Author: glittery orange police squad doesn't the ABA require schools to certify that their students came to class a reasonable amount of time? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743495) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:13 AM Author: flickering hairraiser roommate foreskin come to class =/= being constantly prepared to "stand and deliver" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743508) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:18 AM Author: Sienna brunch halford They do. Although that is also rather pointless, in practice schools never report a student to the bar for lack of attendance and professors do not report students to the school or the bar, even if that student never came to a single one of their classes.
In all honesty, who cares if that student went to class or not if they got a decent grade? does anyone think that that person knows less of the material than his classmates who did worse on the final?
|
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:24 AM Author: glittery orange police squad i do find it strange that the concept of attendance seems to be a bigger deal at law school than it was at my ugrad...and probably most other grad programs in general.
i don't have a lot of sympathy for people who don't show up or prepare a bit for classes though. unless there is a good excuse (work/family) it just shows a lack of character. is it really asking THAT much to show up for a couple hrs every day or so? |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:36 AM Author: Sienna brunch halford Yes it is asking a lot. Some of these people are like me and aren't even living in the same metro area as the law school; some would much rather be sleeping; some are doing something productive. It is like asking someone to detail cars for a couple of hours each day in order to get a law degree. Students are completely justified in saying, "No, I'm not going to take this shit from you" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743612) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:13 PM Author: Godawful Mind-boggling Meetinghouse Um, okay... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6744503) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:13 AM Author: Sienna brunch halford listen to this utterly delusional comment:
"A follow up. Angry law students (not just "angry law student") routinely assume that "teaching" is something that can be done without student engagement in the classroom. This deeply misunderstands legal education. It has nothing to do with our egos (though we've got those, to be sure); it is simply impossible for us to do our job well if students don't do the reading and refuse to let the classroom be a forum for engagement. Students are not paying to be lectured at; that's what they pay for when they pay for their bar courses. You are paying for a lot more -- and some of that added value can only be accomplished if you do your part. And you aren't just getting a bad value for yourself (and potentially a bad grade) if you are passive; you are actually reducing others' value. Your fellow students are paying, in part, to hear what you think."
how typical of a law professor to assume that it is impossible to learn the material in any way other than what has been done for a hundred years. I suppose he should let his colleagues who do not use the socratic method know that they too deeply misunderstand legal education. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:20 AM Author: glittery orange police squad I agree it was unwise to post his opinions like this in a blog, and it probably doesn't serve any purpose to penalize students for not being prepared....as long as there is some manner of grading.
But just as I'd find it annoying if all my classmates were gunners, it would also suck if nobody did any work or said anything in class when called on... |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:23 AM Author: Sienna brunch halford yea, it means the professor has to prepare more material to talk about in his class and may end up working a brutal 12 hour week instead of an 9 hour one (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743563) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:27 AM Author: glittery orange police squad as a newb, i'm not sure yet what to make out of the socratic method yet. do you think lectures teach more than asking questions which force you to do the readings and think about them?
i'm not sure. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:33 AM Author: Sienna brunch halford to some extent it depends on the person, but I think for most people there is no question that a lecture is better. There is this myth that somehow law is totally different than learning anything else, and that's just stupid.
when I was in law school I had absolutely no problem telling a professor straight out "I haven't done the reading. Can you answer that question?" More often though, I didnt bother going to class. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:44 AM Author: glittery orange police squad if you join a boxing class and just want your trainer to show you how to box rather than spar with you or have you spar with other students would that be good? why even train at all as long as you do well in the fight? after all, the trainer works for you. just an analogy - i'll tell you what i conclude in 5 years. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743640) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:48 AM Author: Sienna brunch halford Really I dont know; I dont learn at all from either. For me learning is something I do on my own. But I think that for most people hearing the professor (who is always right in law school) is much more helpful than hearing students (who are seldom right). As much as they try to tell you it's about a process, it's not about a process. It's about learning what arguments your professor wants to see on the exam and remembering them and getting them on the exam. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743649) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:48 AM Author: flickering hairraiser roommate foreskin The apt analogy: Try to figure out how to spar on your own, then I'll throw a series of different punches at you, and see how long you can stand up. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743650) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 3:50 AM Author: aphrodisiac masturbator oh who cares. do your best to teach and if a student doesn't learn, create an exam that will reveal as much.
the only relevant argument he has -- besides outright paternalism -- is that the class as a whole benefits from participation. but he's not claiming to have run out of participation; there's no indication that he could not find enough engaged students to fill the class just by asking for volunteers, or at the very least just skipping over people who aren't prepared.
so i think we can conclude that he is a mustachioed tard. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:06 PM Author: flickering hairraiser roommate foreskin Subject: MUSTACHIOED TARD TITMFCR (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6744466) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:27 PM Author: glittery orange police squad There's something to be said about training for professionalism. When your boss or a client asks you to research an issue and asks for your thoughts the next day are you going to say 'pass'? If you don't develop this discipline until your first week at the office it could be a shock. It could also be a shock if they don't get used to thinking for themselves and having their ideas challenged on the spot.
i don't know why a prof should have the right to grade you based on a final but NOT have the right to grade you on whatever the hell he pleases (such as class participation)...especially if the prof has a mandate where part of his job is to train you to think on your feet.
It is interesting that this attitude of 'just teach me the black letter law and stfu' seems more prevalent at schools like widener than at top schools.
still think the blawg was a bad idea though....
|
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:30 PM Author: flickering hairraiser roommate foreskin Dude, if your chance of being called on in a class is 1/100, how much preparation would you do? Especially when your class prep is worthless at the end of each class? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6744578) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:34 PM Author: glittery orange police squad figuring out how much preparation to do is all part of the learning experience. at work you have to draw your own lines on where to do everything the boss says, and when to do just enough to keep him happy, or at least learn to BS your way through things. The answer isn't simply never to prepare anything. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6744590) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:39 PM Author: flickering hairraiser roommate foreskin That's why I quickly learned to bs my way through getting called on. My other tactic was to volunteer enough early in the semester where the teacher would not want to cold call on me -- this did not always work. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6744603) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 3:18 PM Author: aphrodisiac masturbator i feel like i should note that my attitude is teach whatever he wants -- thinking like a lawyer, social theory of law, law and feminism, whatever -- but then test it on the exam. this is quite different from demanding that he teach only black-letter law. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6744985) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:12 PM Author: Godawful Mind-boggling Meetinghouse Seems pretty spot-on to me.
As far as the Chicken/Egg thing goes -- there's not much Widener can do about who applies and accepts admisson offers, but they can try to address the quality of the students who graduate and form relationships with employers. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:30 AM Author: Galvanic laser beams community account Maybe he should have gotten a job at a non-shithole. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743239) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:53 AM Author: aphrodisiac masturbator hindsight is always 20/20 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743387) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:11 AM Author: citrine haunting ticket booth And, to me, Hugh Downs will always be 20/20 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743499) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:14 AM Author: flickering hairraiser roommate foreskin to me, Mad Dog will always be 20/20 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743514) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:14 PM Author: Godawful Mind-boggling Meetinghouse *lol* (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6744512) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:03 AM Author: Sienna brunch halford I guess NYU feels the same way about its students (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743453) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:25 AM Author: Milky kitchen total kike. obviously (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743572) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 2:29 AM Author: Narrow-minded shrine mexican Fuck! I left an insulting comment. Damn alcohol.... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743589) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 4:11 AM Author: aphrodisiac masturbator it's just as fun sober (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6743773) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 5:11 AM Author: Mauve talented casino "You really believe employers may somehow think your students are sufficiently dedicated to their work? How many of your fellow professors attended the school at which you currently teach?"
Posted by: John | Oct 7, 2006 2:19:38 AM
lol |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 11:14 AM Author: Tantric spruce international law enforcement agency stage Excellent. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6744024) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:00 PM Author: glittery orange police squad some excellent comments are there now... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6744436) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:04 PM Author: Bright crawly forum water buffalo fucking awesome: i know this is a respectable "professor's" weblog (actually, it's not even a normal blog. it's a "blawg"), but i have to say some things.
let me get this straight: "average" widener students are harmed by their dumber schoolmates because the dumb schoolmates lower the reputation of the school, which makes employers reluctant to hire widener students? pure nonsense. employers don't give a damn who talks in class or whether one widener student is more "committed" than another. widener grads don't get jobs because they scored horribly on the LSAT, had horrible GPAs in college, and attended a horrible law school. your class has little to do with widener students' inability to get jobs, and class participation generally has no effect on students' job prospects (query whether these "bad" students would have anything useful to say even if they were to "prepare" for your class), except to the extent that you decrease their grade because they didn't answer a question correctly or didn't bother to read some irrelvant case (make no mistake about it: 96% of the material you cover in your class has no practical value to these students, most of which will become public defenders or insurance defense attorneys or something similarly dreadful).
and i like how you insist on calling students "bad" and lazy, as if they could become "good" students if they just had the motivation and "committment." i guess you don't realize that, because of the forced curve, there will always be "bad" widener students, even if every single student were equally intelligent and motivated.
i wonder how widener students feel when their professors call them "average" and "less than stellar" (read: far from stellar). professor, if you wanted to teach a bunch of smart kids, perhaps you should have tried harder to land that job at virginia law or whatever moderately prestigious law school you applied to before settling on widener.
i really hope a widener student reads your post. these kids ought to know what their professors really think about them.
|
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:09 PM Author: flickering hairraiser roommate foreskin Hi Esaias! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6744480) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:14 PM Author: Milky kitchen i likey (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6744511) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:17 PM Author: Godawful Mind-boggling Meetinghouse Horribly reasoned, but amusing.
"most of which will become public defenders or insurance defense attorneys or something similarly dreadful" |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:18 PM Author: Milky kitchen horribly reasoned? i thought it was pretty on-point. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6744528) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:22 PM Author: Glassy native You guys always miss his shtick, he's called rational thought because he's anything but!
I get it dude HAHAHAHAH! |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 3:15 PM Author: aphrodisiac masturbator "96% of the material you cover in your class has no practical value to these students, most of which will become public defenders or insurance defense attorneys or something similarly dreadful"
con law is actually relevant to a lot of public defenders, though admittedly less so than crim pro
"i guess you don't realize that, because of the forced curve, there will always be "bad" widener students, even if every single student were equally intelligent and motivated."
but it's absolute levels of skill and dedication that matter in the workplace, not relative. so if he makes his whole school smarter, there will still be people at the bottom of the curve but job prospects for all of them should improve over time to reflect the students' newfound competence. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:19 PM Author: gaped abode hi, widener student! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6744530) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2006 1:42 PM Author: glittery orange police squad How DO widener students end up doing? I'm ignorant about the school beyond its ranking. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6744615) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2006 11:28 AM Author: aphrodisiac masturbator poorly (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=501698&forum_id=2#6749401) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2006 11:19 AM Author: glittery orange police squad "The comments to this entry are closed."
I particularly like the last comment:
"...I have often heard of and personally experienced your blatant disrespect for Widener University School of Law and its students through comments essentially meaning “You're at Widener, don't bother applying for ..." or “go back and talk to your 5th grade English teacher because most of you didn’t learn how to write.” Your approach in class of "fear me for I am thou your professor" was at first terrifying and then absolutely insulting...HOW DARE YOU SAY THAT WE ARE LESS THAN STELLAR?" |