Comments on: Another Law Professor Screws Up Exam Time

By: guest

guest — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 16:15:58 +0000

It was widely believed that my corporations professor at Stanford simply assigned one’s current GPA as the grade to his exam.
An alternative was that he threw the exams en masse down the stairwell, and the ones that fell the furthest got the highest grades – or maybe it was the other way around. The evidence supported the first theory – i.e., one got one’s GPA. How he got around the use of supposedly randomly assigned ID numbers isn’t clear

By: guest

guest — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:53:33 +0000

Adjunct status + no significant publications + tenured wife in different academic unit = spousal hire.

By: guest

guest — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:15:31 +0000

Whiney bitch

By: guest

guest — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 21:48:07 +0000

QED 51, QED

By: guest

guest — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 15:18:00 +0000

I took evidence from Cribari and his exams are well written and cover the material well. MC and T/F questions are preferable for a rules based class like evidence. I’m guessing Elie didn’t take evidence and has it confused with a Crim Proc class where a long, complex essay would be more appropriate. This debacle sounds like it was caused by his lack of organization with keeping track of materials he’s written, not with laziness.
GOOOOOOOOO GOOOOOOOOLDEN GOOOOOOOPHERS!!!!!!!!!!!!

By: guest

guest — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 15:05:12 +0000

Ellie: you suck and this blog sucks. Get a fuckin life.

By: guest

guest — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 13:40:33 +0000

I love these morons stating that U od M is a shit law school. First off, it’s a top 20 school, is it harvard, no, but it’s a very well respected school. Second, notice how none of the retards saying U of M is shit law school say where they went, because they actually went to a shit law school.
6, 38 and 39-I am talking to you fucking morons. I can guarantee U of M is a significantly better law school than any of you retards could ever dream of getting into.

By: guest

guest — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:32:57 +0000

MC tests can be a real bitch. My torts professor gave only MC and they were, by far the most difficult exams of law school. When it came time to take the MBE, I realized his questions were harder than the MBE.
As to careless professors – my 1L civ pro professor was going through a personally trying time. I tried to be understanding when she was late or canceled class or seemed scattered and unprepared but her final exam was the biggest load of crap in the history of exams. It was MC, short answer, and a couple essays. She’d clearly cobbled together the exam from past exams as the font changed mid-question. It was distracting that she used students’ names as the parties. It was more distracting when some of the answer choices referred to parties not mentioned in the fact pattern. (A friend told me he spent more than ten minutes reading and re-reading to find out where the party mentioned in one choice was in the fact pattern). The piece de resistance though was in one of the essay questions. The question required the student/law clerk to advise the judge on the motion for summary judgment filed in a case. She had the expert witness making the motion. In my answer I advised the judge to ignore the motion from the witness since he wasn’t a party and then went on to answer the question I knew she actually wanted answered. People who noticed the zillions of errors (some didn’t) were flaming mad. We spent untold number of hours studying and she couldn’t proofread the flippin’ test? I complained to the dean of students which began my lengthy and heralded career as the campus squeaky wheel.

By: guest

guest — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 08:35:34 +0000

You’re thinking of Wisconsin.

By: guest

guest — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 14:07:41 +0000

45, 46, 47 you are wrong.