Unclassy Classes
Open thread about classes and related issues for 1, 2, and 3Ls, per request.
-- Incoming Boalties: "So, like, do I have to like know everything about everything?"
-- Rising 2Ls: "CLR, CLR, CLR, CLR, CLR..."
-- Rising 3Ls: "We're all top 10%."
OK, this is not at all funny.
-- Incoming Boalties: "So, like, do I have to like know everything about everything?"
-- Rising 2Ls: "CLR, CLR, CLR, CLR, CLR..."
-- Rising 3Ls: "We're all top 10%."
OK, this is not at all funny.
Labels: 0L/1L Advice, Classes/Professors, CLR, Grades And Other Neurotic Bullshit, Professor Ratings
posted by Armen Adzhemyan at 9:58 AM
49 Comments:
CLR? When do we hear? Anyone?
I think you hear sometime in August. I was one of many who did not complete the packet, so good luck to those who actually put in all that work.
shout out to incoming transfers. don't let armen's hating stop you from enjoying your new digs.
Also good luck to those waiting to hear from CLR. You'll especially need this luck if you are a non-diverse applicant.
Passive-agressive much, 11:23?
Thankya for obliging, Armen! For the 3L's and or bar-procrastinators -
1. Someone tell me about tax. Am I in for a bruising taking that and CPII at the same time (too many rules)?
2. What's the best seminar you've taken at Boalt?
3. Is it a good or bad idea to put off professional responsibility till 3L year (i'm thinking it's on the "easy" side - which will tailor well to being a lazy 3L).
Thanks in advance!
Oh, and CLR, schmee-LR. I'm more worried about having to take classes again after enjoying my summer so much . . .
I assume we fulfill the con law requirement with a 3 unit or a 4 unit course? Anyone heard anything about the adjunct teaching in the fall? I know Choper's is best, but my schedule doesn't work for that one. Advice?
1:21--1: take tax. i dropped it first semester 2L and wish i had just stuck with it. a pain in the ass, but good stuff to know, rakowski is hot, and you're not going to get a sub-p.
2: i only took IP seminars but for the most part liked them all except the IP scholarship seminar.
3: if you aren't interested in public interest, take PR when it's focused on firm practice. 2L, 3L doesn't matter. I took the public interest version and was pretty damn bored the whole time. i would have rather heard war stories about ridiculous things that partners do than listen to people bitch about prof. yoo.
also, i will submit that CLR is overrated. some people probably really get into it, but i found it to be fairly off-putting. can't hurt to have it on your resume, though.
It certainly can't hurt to have CLR on your resume, but I don't think it helps very much, particularly if you are staying in CA. Firms and judges around here all know that CLR has a "Diversity Editor," with all that implies about the selection process and governance of the organization.
CPII isn't too bad. I would take both CP II and PR to get them out of the way. It sucks to be doing anything you have to do as a 3L.
What's with all the snarky comments about CLR and diversity? Boalt is not the most diverse place (compare Boalt demographics to Cal demographics--even Cal middle class demographics).
CLR is not diverse, despite some recent attempts to infuse diversity. Where's the evidence, 4:56 PM, that having a diversity editor has lowered the prestige of the law review?? Professors still want to publish in CLR, and everyone (OK academics and judge types) read it.
And, as a "diversity candidate" who failed to write on, I can assure any of you "non-diverse" candidates who have been comforting yourself with this thought, that you didn't write on because your classmates beat you out fair and square, not because you are "non-diverse." Now go cry me a river.
This isn't 4:56. But I think the real issue with CLR is that grades are not taken into account in any way. Maybe people would have less trouble with diversity editors and the like if there were some other objective test of performance (of course there is the argument that grades are not objective, but I'm not going there right now). Grades can be a reasonable partial proxy for performance and ability.
As it is CLR's procedure seems very black box. So people blame "diversity" for the reason they didn't get on, fairly or not. CLR spends a lot of time promoting its need and desire to be diverse, and to some people, that message sounds like it overrides the desire to get the best people, produce top scholarship and compromises the main mission of the organization.
I don't think there is any doubt that both Boalt and CLR are not diverse, and I think most agree that is problematic. But I don't know if Boalt or CLR are actually going about addressing that problem in the right way, or at least making it clear how exactly a diversity bump is factored in.
Oh lordy, the summer CLR thread. Look at what you've done Armen!
Regarding classes, I think John Steele's firm-focus class is perfect for COIP'ing 2Ls. It's low intensity, so if you're overwhelmed by interviews, you won't feel too guilty for missing it. Yet I think he tells a lot of great stories and gives good advice that can be somewhat helpful during interviewing, at the very least to give you an attorney's view of the madness that is big law.
thanks for the responses re: PR. perhaps I should be less coy in my question - is it a lot of work? i guess you said it's not bad to miss it, but it'll be my 14-17th units, so i'm wondering if i should just put it off . . .
re: "CLR is not diverse" -- compared to the rest of the student body, CLR is quite diverse. There is a much higher proportion of african americans, latino/as, and homosexuals on CLR than in the general student body. Obviously CLR's diversity is constrained by the overall student body's diversity and by the applicant pool.
Boalt is a very diverse place. Students come from a variety of backgrounds and geographic regions, and have had a wide variety of prior jobs, careers, and life experiences. Yet proponents of affirmative action still feel the need to measure diversity by skin color, which at this point in our lives, is probably a very poor measure of any meaningful diversity beyond skin color. Everyone loves to tout "diversity" without ever asking what it means or why it matters.
It seems like diversity of opinion and political view might be a more relevant type of diversity for a scholarly journal, no?
re: PR--
not a lot of work. i took the non-firm, barely did the reading, the test is mostly just the rules so you can cram and learn them. plus take the mpre at the same time and you'll have to learn 'em anyway. steele will make it seem like you have to show up and participate and whatever, but you don't.
definitely agree on the lack of political diversity on CLR (and Boalt in general--it's out there, but often shouted down).
6:32, I'd remind you that:
1.07 Class Preparation and Attendance.
We expect every student to prepare fully for class and to participate actively in class discussion. For this purpose regular attendance and preparation of assignments are required. In the absence of prior communication of a valid excuse to the instructor, an instructor may exclude a student from a class for which the student is unprepared. An instructor may, by written notice, exclude a student from the final examination on the basis of repeated unexcused absence or unpreparedness that have occurred after the instructor has given the student prior written notice that there may be such an exclusion. In determining the student's grade in the course, the instructor may consider the quality of a student's preparation and of his or her participation in class discussion. See Grading Rules 1 (H) below. See also the note to Rule 3.02(A)(1) below, regarding disqualification.
--
I've never seen it enforced (desuetude?), but it's out there. You're supposed to go to class.
Tom
Income Tax is a gritty experience that builds character. Imagine one of Calvin's camping trips - it's like that. You'll learn enough tax to be dangerous and to lose all respect for Congress. Mr. Smith Goes to Washington will be ruined for you. But you can refill that place in your heart with a masochistic love for Prof. Rakowski.
If you don't make CLR, your life is not over. The wide world of externships, LRW/WOA TAing, ASP tutoring and working for a professor opens up for you. If anyone is feeling dejected in a few weeks, post a comment and I think we can supply some ideas for how to spend the next two years.
Tom,
I know of someone who was on the wrong end of that rule and nearly did not graduate from Boalt (it was his third year last semester).
Incoming boalties, post some questions or something. Ignore the recurrence of the perpetual discussion (er, argument) about CLR; it's just one of many fine coversational fallbacks that you'll have at boalt when you run out of other things to talk about. Other topics include John Yoo, the registrar's office, and class rankings. Seriously, questions, people!
the whole idea that grades should be taken into account as a proxy for ability to competently do CLR work is laughable. Editing a CLR piece or that of any other journal isn't necessarily rocket science and certainly isn't something that a person who studied a bit harder first year would necessarily be better at.
What CLR is, however, is a huge pain in the ass. Much like the week-long write-on. As opposed to grades, the ability to slog through the write-on drudgery and throw together something cogent and coherent I think is a perfect proxy for law review/journal aptitude.
I know a dude who never attended class (literally never, like prof. did not recognize him at the review session). He prosser'd the class . . .
Nudging back on topic...I highly recommend that 2Ls take a seminar in the fall that forces you to write a paper and then talking to the professor about how to make that paper into your writing requirement. You can usually get another credit or two out of it in the spring (I'm sure there's some rule about not using a paper for two purposes, but I've never heard it is enforced). I know that ELQ and BTLJ each devote an issue a year to student writing (maybe other journals do too--I don't know), so you can also get published. And it is SO worth it getting your writing requirement out of the way 2L year. Unless you have a reason to wait until 3L year, try and do it 2L year. I loved not having it hanging over me this past spring....
And honestly...you're paying so much in tuition, if you're even mildly interested in the class, um, go to class. Especially, as Armen noted somewhere earlier, if it's about mortgages.
Especially, as Armen noted somewhere earlier, if it's about mortgages.
And torts. For those of us like Jenna and I who had Prof. Moran for torts, we could have really benefit from a second torts class...maybe Torts II? Torts You Didn't Cover With Moran? Whatever the hell you want to call it, Boalt needs to offer it. A five-god-damned-unit class and all we ever covered was negligence? Where the fuck are Jose Conseco and his intentional torts? Did he use a defective bat/steroids? Did Moran defame Conseco by constantly using him in her hypos?
This applies to Westen's Crim also. I really could have benefited from a little less sexually deviant, awkward, and uncomfortable remarks and a little more discussion of larceny. I hate the bar.
As for tax, I'm not as jaded as Tom about the internal revenue code, but it is a good class to take. I guess the Big Rakowski's not teaching next semester, but there's no other area of law where so many people are affected. Plus you'll know how to make even MORE money by reducing your tax burden.
PR is a VERY useful class. It's one of the few areas where we covered EVERYTHING that is on the bar. And yes, PR is on the bar. You have to take the MPRE, but on the real bar they test it also with essays. You can't skip John Steele's class too much (he allows 3), but as Caliboy said, it's not really onerous material on a weekly basis.
Most importantly, I have to vehemently disagree with the idea that you should take a light load during your OCIP semester. I took 16 and did fine. OCIP is NOT as bad as people make it out to be. That's what people are saying about the bar in the thread below and I sort of scowl at them, so I can understand if the rising 2Ls don't take me at my word. But if you're going to be flying around to interview, you actually might have more time to read. Honestly, I was always up on my reading because I'd read on flights, hotel rooms with crappy cable lineups, airports, etc.
OK, caffeine is wearing off. Me tired.
I second Jenna, and recommend taking a writing seminar first semester 2L year. It's great to get it out of the way, plus it gives you an early glimpse into whether you'd be interested in taking more writing-intensive seminars down the road, or would prefer to stick with the doctrinal exam-based classes. Jenna's wicked smart.
I'd also like to know just how much work Steele's PR class is. This was probably addressed above and I overlooked it, so sorry in advance. But how much preparation does he expect? Are you assigned a day to be on call or do you need to be ready everytime?
Thanks, and good luck on the bar, everyone. I can't imagine doing that right now.
I really don't know what else to add to what I said above. Do you want like the number of pages? It's a class about what lawyers can and can't do, most of the reading material was about lawyers who did what they couldn't do.
You need to know the stuff as much as any other class to avoid awkward "Oh I'm not prepared" moments. But as it was said above, the bulk of the exam is on the rules.
Is there a new website where we can see how full classes for Fall are?
Following Armen's lead, I'll add Harris' Crim class to the list of bar classes that were useless for the bar (and more generally useless). As far as I can tell, the bar is not going to ask me any questions about how criminal law disproportionally affects African-Americans (as if I didn't know that before I took her class). Or jury nullification. Or whether African-Americans should practice jury nullification in order to right historic wrongs, the subject of an article she made us a read.
Maybe she made her lesson plan from the literature available at Top Dog?
with crim, i think it's just the topic. i have met *no one*, even the "crim law people", who enjoyed his or her first year crim class. it's a morass that, in my case, required me to poke myself in the leg with a pencil to stay awake. (how's that for enthusiasm, incoming 1L's!)
Torts is super-fun though. I loved it.
In re: 9:58. I think you'll be hard pressed to find a Boalt student who didn't love Crim with Professor Murphy. I would argue that any course can be fun or boring depending on the professor. My torts class, for example, was awful.
I agree with 10:05--the professor is the key. A good professor can make anything interesting.
My advice is to take classes from professors who are under, say, 45, or from professors who have a PhD. There are some good profs outside of those categories, but those who meet either or both of those criteria are almost certainly going to be great teachers, and seem to care more about teaching (e.g., Murphy, Joseph O'Connell, Liu, Guzman)
Anyone know anything about Gamage for income tax? They added him for a new section awhile ago. I want to take it with Rakowksi, but not sure if I can wait. I need to fill up my schedule.
Gamage for tax? Anyone know anything about this professor?
I think it has already been said, but I just wanted to point out that Rakowski is on sabbatical along with many of our other good professors this Fall.
Can someone comment on a good course to take that fulfills the writing requirement? Everyone keeps saying to do it 2L year, so if anyone knows of a good/easy way to do this in the fall, I am all ears.
I'm not a "crim" person, and I have Crim Law as a 1L with Westin and really liked it. Definitely one of my favorite classes as a 1L. The material was thought-provoking and interesting, although a lot more abstract and ill-defined than other 1L courses. Professor Westin put a lot of effort into teaching and was always happy to chat about what was discussed in class or any other crim law topic.
edit: should be "had Crim Law as a 1L" and "Westen"
Global Migration Issues with Jastram is good (but not easy).
Aww, thanks 7:24. I hope I won't burst your bubble of my wicked abilities when I am less than thrilled in November. At least my wedding invitations are going to be pretty. Priorities, people.
And Steele's PR--it's as much work as you want it to be. I did the paper option (not sure if he's still allowing that, actually) and it ended up being a ton of work b/c I wanted to write something that I cared about and liked. So that was my own fault. I know many people who did nothing at all all semester, studied for the take home while taking the take home, and did fine. Oh, and by doing the paper, not only did I create lots of extra work for myself, but I didn't actually learn any PR, so I had to learn it all for the MPRE, and now for the bar. So think about that before you decide to write a paper.
And re: the 1L classes and how much help they are for the bar--I think Peterson came the closest to actually covering the most. Maybe not mortgages (that would be Real Estate II for those playing along at home) but she did a decent enough job w/ CP.
I second the Peterson kudos, and nominate Bundy for similar kudos for his treatment of jurisdiction in Civ Pro II.
Is it an accident that the profs that prepare you best for the bar are the profs that don't do much scholarly writing?
Any thoughts on Accounting for Lawyers?
Accounting For Lawyers is exactly what it purports to be: a very general introduction to the basic accounting documents suitable for people with no business or finance experience. It was extremely valuable for me, since I began the class with no idea what a balance sheet even looked like, or how it might differ from a cash-flow statement. The class isn't very hard, but if you begin knowing nothing, you end up learning a lot. I recommend it for anyone who expects to work for a firm that has corporations as clients (i.e. most of us). DeLeo's Introduction to Financial Analysis is aimed at a similar audience, and is also very useful. I found DeLeo himself to be thoughtful, entertaining, and good at explaining financial concepts to people (like me) seeing them for the first time. One caveat: the texts for both classes were problematic--the assigned reading didn't always correlate very well with what went on in the lectures.
Erin Murphy is the best teaching prof at boalt, hands down. you'd be a fool not to take crim pro with her. she's wicked smart, funny, and runs a tight ship of a class. do your reading and learn a ton from a pro.
CLR calls are going out.
Was that Mr. Sherwin giving Westin kudos? Had to have been...
If anyone is still interested in Gamage for Tax, I work with people who go to school at Texas. Although none of them have had Gamage, they have online evaluations similar to ours. He averages about 4 out of 5 (where 5 is the best) for most of the categories.
I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with the comment about Prof. Murphy being the "best teaching prof at boalt." Not trying to throw around insults, but in my experience getting a straight answer is like pulling teeth...
Post a Comment
<< Home