3L Class Campaign
It's coming down to the last few days of the 3L class campaign.
What started out as a rather lackluster showing has been picking up speed in recent days and most mods are down to their last 3-4 people who have yet to donate.
Don't be someone who will go down in history as one of the handful of people without a star next to their name in the graduation book - for all your closest friends and family to notice!
Donation forms are always available in the library, next to the reference
desk. However, the easiest method is to donate online here.
Remember: it's the mere fact you're donating that counts - any [even small] amount will go a long way to helping your school.
Do it now - then bug a friend to do the same! You're almost out of time to be counted!
What started out as a rather lackluster showing has been picking up speed in recent days and most mods are down to their last 3-4 people who have yet to donate.
Don't be someone who will go down in history as one of the handful of people without a star next to their name in the graduation book - for all your closest friends and family to notice!
Donation forms are always available in the library, next to the reference
desk. However, the easiest method is to donate online here.
Remember: it's the mere fact you're donating that counts - any [even small] amount will go a long way to helping your school.
Do it now - then bug a friend to do the same! You're almost out of time to be counted!
posted by tj at 11:36 PM
84 Comments:
I don't want my degree to be qualified by an asterisk. Those usually mean something like "not valid in Omaha."
I think it's safe to say that someone who has not donated at this point--after all the emails and pestering by class mods--doesn't want to be counted.
In the past two weeks, I've seen some aggressive haranguing by class representatives on the few standouts. I don't think that's very productive. Some 3Ls simply don't want to participate--and they don't want a peer to make a symbolic donation "on their behalf," either. Whatever anyone thinks about that decision, it's ultimately theirs to make. Harassing a person to relent isn't going to change his or her mind...and it's not exactly going to endear him or her to making real donations in the future.
Carbolic, I think that attitude is somewhat selfish and short-sighted. Thus, maybe the campaign reps would prefer to think that maybe some people just haven't gotten around to clicking the link and giving a nominal amount to the class. Given your recent postings on US News rank, I'd hope that you'd understand why full class participation is so important.
As someone who had no reservations about donating personally, I still think the "star next to your name" policy is completely obnoxious. I'm alright with applying pressure up to a point, but people shouldn't be publicly shamed for not donating. It's coercive and frankly tacky.
You say public shaming, I say public recognition for having given. Putting asterisks next to the names of those that hadn't donated would be the tacky move.
It is not true that people who have not donated at this point are people who do not want to be counted.
4 or 5 people donated yesterday, who had simply forgotten to bring their checkbooks or cash before, and didn't want to donate online.
It's already been said, but it's worth a second. Pressuring donations is tacky. As is threatening someone with a "lack of recognition." By contrast, consider Matthew 6:1-4:
1"Be careful not to do your 'acts of righteousness' before men, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.
2"So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. 3But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.
I'm not saying the school should dispense with recognition; obviously, some prefer it or don't care. But there are strong reasons not to seek such aggrandizement, and this is what makes such pressure "tacky."
And for what? As conceded by the call, this is not about raising money. It's about juking stats to convey a false sense of the school and its student body. Again, tacky.
Haha. wow. bit of a blow up there.
I think it's quite clear - people who don't participate in the class campaign are clearly doing so to make a statement (it's certainly not for the lack of money). Those who make a statement will have the opportunity to do so when their names are not starred in the graduation book. What's the big deal? Aren't they getting what they want?
But Carbolic is flat wrong. There are most definitely people with every intention of donating who have not done so yet - and need the reminder to do so if their donation is to be counted. I have encountered a dozen or so in the past couple days alone. The biggest problem is that people don't seem to realize that the campaign ends 2 weeks before graduation and they can't wait until the last minute to be counted...
And Tom: you're wrong as well. The sole reason isn't just "juking stats" - there's a big benefit to get people on the path toward future giving and it starts now. Boalt lags far behind other peer schools in its ability to maintain high levels of giving and this kind of push early on is exactly what is needed.
Yeah, this entire process is confusing the hell out of me. You shouldn't donate just because other people are doing it. Nor should you donate just to receive recognition. You should donate because you feel Boalt deserves your money. If you want to convince those who haven't donated yet, maybe you should provide arguments as to that last point.
Also, I had heard a rumor that this donation percentage had some effect on our U.S. News Ranking. But looking here I don't seem to see any relation between the two. So, why exactly is it a big deal if we reach 100% or not?
and Laura: tacky is not donating five bucks.
10:07 - to get people on a path towards giving - it's most definitely going to show up when those later donations mean more money for the school (>15% or so of the total score when adding expenditure items together)...
And much like a board for a non-profit being expected to have a 100% donation rate before a rich benefactor will up his ante, the same applies here.
It matters to our more wealthy and elder alumni to see a 3L class that is on board with what the school is trying to do and the direction it is going...
tj, you are right, the people, like myself, who are refusing to donate even a penny are doing so to make a statement. But that statement is aimed at the school administration, not the public at large. The stars next to the names at graduation is just a tacky move to coerce participation. I think it's BS that that's the way the school wants to go about encouraging donations, but so be it.
Furthermore, while I fully expact to donate further into my career, this fiasco about coercing donations is decreasing the chances of that happening rather than increasing it. So if the intent of this push is to "get people on the path toward future giving," I think these coercive tactics are hurting rather than helping, at least with the last few hold outs.
After looking at the numbers, 10:16, you're certainly in the very tiny minority of those who have yet to donate.
One thing I want to suggest, however, is that you make your particular problem with the school heard. I've been surprised with how so many people who had previously declared not to be donating for a particular reason were actually quite off base in their reasoning. In other circumstances, their problems were actually already being addressed by school officials.
PLEASE DON'T JUST SIT ON THE SIDELINES AND THINK YOUR POINT IS BEING HEARD. Make your point vocally to the administration NOW and see if something can be done about it.
There's nothing worse than a pointless gesture - you'd be surprised how receptive the administration would be!!!
And then you can decide whether you're going to donate and could still get it in on time...
One more thing 10:16:
Your rationale of "I want to make a statement to the administration but don't want to make it to the public at large" is somewhat misguided if you're choosing this particular method to make your statement.
There's nothing more public than the well-disseminated statistic of 3L class giving rate. If you're making a statement by not giving, then you're making it VERY public.
That statistic is used in all the marketing materials - especially in the ones where this school is trying to make a pitch to older alums for more money. That money is ESSENTIAL to expand faculty and improve our shitty facilities.
Maybe there's a different way you can make a statement if you don't want it to be public? How about scheduling a meeting with DE - chances are you'd be a whole lot more effective with your message...
I mean this without any judgment whatsoever, 10:16, but can I ask what statement you're trying to get across to the administration?
Honestly, I'm just curious what has people upset these days.
I think a little wisdom from the hood might be in order at this point: don't hate the player, hate the game.
Many of the gift abstainers seem to be blaming Boalt for trying to manipulate numbers or being part of some cynical game. Fact is, the US News game, is the field we've been given so I fail to see the utility in punishing Boalt (and the your fellow students whose future career prospects are affected by Boalt's current and future stature) by not donating.
If you're mad at US News, please take it out on them. If you're mad at Boalt, let the administration know. But to a large degree this class gift is about standing in solidarity with your fellow classmates.
A related point: I especially fail to see the logic of one of the commenters who said that he/she plans "to give in the future" but is trying to make a statement now. When you give in the future, the administration will listen obsequiously as you prepare to open your wallet. By not donating now, your statement (not having the star by your name) is the equivalent to wearing a goofy hat at graduation that says "fire John Yoo." It's a silly gesture regarding a serious point that should be made in other forums.
While there are obviously people who are "making a statement" as 10:16 claims, I donated the day before yesterday and can honestly say that it was simply a matter of laziness.
I'm sure there are more out there who simply haven't gotten around to donating, so a little peer pressure is in order.
To those who are making a statement, simply inform those pressuring you and I'm sure the haranguing will stop.
My class ('07) had a 100% donation rate. To my knowledge, that was unprecedented. The size of the gift was also the largest to date, but that was due in large part to a single individual's generosity (not mine). Can anyone say whether the class of '08 repeated the 100% rate? More importantly, can anyone say that the 100% donation rate made a difference--in marketing, perception of the school by alums, rankings, etc? I don't ask facetiously; I truly don't know.
As I recall, the 100% left some students with a bitter taste in their mouths. The feeling that you buckled to peer pressure; the feeling that those pimping donations were too heavy-handed; the feeling that the exercise was one of form over substance. Maybe a good send-off to the real world. I don't know. I think there was a N&B thread about it.
Looking back, I'm not particularly impressed with that 100% number. I guess its significance in my experience at Boalt was very limited. Yes, I have made some donations since then, but that wasn't a factor. I benefit when Berkeley rises in the rankings, but I have a feeling that most of the credit for that should go to DE, not a few extra, purely perfunctory gifts of $5.
What does it matter if someone doesn't donate now, but does in the future? It's been established here already that $5 doesn't really matter in the big picture. Does the mod with the highest percentage win something? If not, what's the big deal if someone doesn't donate now?
I know for a fact that the more someone annoys me to do something, the less likely I am do to it, especially when it seems incredibly futile. It isn't to "make a statement"; I legitimately plan to donate in the future. But these donations may be reduced by my final impression of school here at Boalt, especially if I walk away being really annoyed.
I assume the point of this all is to get a contact list database down for FUTURE donations, and not to raise money in the short term (especially if really insignificant donations are "counted" towards your "star"). If you want to get 100% participation, give away cookies for people that give their information. Cut the donation process completely out, or make it optional.
Nothing says "F you" to someone $120k in debt, that was already surprised by $5k jacks in tuition, in an uncertain economy, like bugging the hell out of them for $1.
Here's the biggest recurring reason I've heard for not wanting to donate, which I agree with (although I've since made my meaningless $1 donation): Dean H!rshen treating 3Ls like children with regard to the writing requirement this semester.
I don't know if anyone's brought this up with DE, but I'm pretty sure he's aware of it.
Toney: I think that line of reasoning ignores the fact that the people running the campaign have no real desire or benefit to doing so. It really came down to the fact that they were the only ones willing to step up to the plate for something essential.
If you don't like them harassing you, do your part and donate (when it's your time to do so). I guarantee they don't like it any more than you do.
Agreed.
I donated, but I think we could dedicate an entire thread, if not an entire blog, to the ridiculous antics of Dean H!rshen this year.
That's actually a pretty good concept ...
I'm in agreement with the H!rshen reasoning. But I have also been annoyed by the school's more or less lack of adequate reaction to the situation a lot of us are in (i.e. job losses/deferrals). The CDO's informational meeting on it was pretty lackluster.
Specifically, I would like to see the school push for or offer an extension of health insurance for those of us with deferred starts.
Here's a list of things the admins could be doing to make people actually want to donate: http://abovethelaw.com/2009/04/georgetown_is_the_latest_law_s.php
The idea behind the class gift campaign is that it gives alumni the impression (whether true or not) that all or nearly-all graduating 3Ls have so enjoyed their experience that alumni feel inspired (or shamed) into likewise contributing. I don't know if that actually works. As Callagy points out, the giving rate is so patently coerced and artificial ("Can I make the symbolic donation for you?") that I can't really find anyone really falling for it.
One thing is for sure: nobody can argue that donations are not coerced when, in the same breath, he or she calls non-contributors "tacky" or "selfish." And TJ--what the hell kind of response is "If you don't like getting harassed, then donate?" Students shouldn't be harassed into donating in the first place. I have a radical idea: if you don't want to harass people, don't.
Really, I think the most obstinate minority of non-participants object not so much to the school, but to the fundraising itself. These class mod positions are like the Cutco jobs people get in college. It's trying to raise money by exploiting friendships. When the pitch becomes personal (i.e., "Why haven't you contributed, Mr. 3L?"), it's distasteful. And when it because argumentative (i.e., "You should listen to me explain why it's important"), it's just tacky.
For the record, I think the criticisms of H!rshen are misplaced. Just because her predecessor didn't enforce the rules doesn't mean that DH is a bad person for doing so.
And I think that the many 3Ls who haven't finished their writing requirements five days before finals can't really complain that they're being pressed to finish. Strictly speaking, it was supposed to have been done last year; it's just that Ortiz never emphasized it.
The point of my comment was simply that we're not here to harass people who have made up their minds that they won't donate. We're here to keep the word out there for those who may donate but haven't gotten around to doing it yet.
If you're not going to donate, please take up your reasons with the administration - not those trying to run the campaign. They're not the ones that can do anything about it.
And don't make it seem like this is some persecuted group of holdouts. For every one person who gets asked why they don't want to donate and has a particular reason, there are 5 who are asked and the reason is they haven't gotten around to doing it yet - and they thank us for the reminder.
Boalt's administration isn't bending over backwards to tide you over for four extra months before you start your $160K job, so you want to punish them?
Sigh.
I thought this invidious sense of entitlement was laid to rest right around the time Lehman collapsed.
The real world is a big, unpredictable, scary place. No one is going to hold your hand out there. Deal with it.
(Sorry. I know we've had this thread already.)
Carbolic @ 12:07: It's not just that H!rshen's now enforcing the rules that Ort!z should have enforced in the first place.
The point is, 3Ls at this point have relied to their detriment on the policy of Dean Ort!z, and now H!rshen's policy is being applied ex post facto.
She should have kept Ort!z's policy in place for 3Ls and started her policy for current 2Ls, instead of putting on an act and demanding the requirement be fulfilled by spring break.
She didn't enforce that policy but it was a needless headache that brought to mind notions of the bureaucratic "red tape" that Dean Ort!z worked so hard to do away with.
@12:25 PM. Entitlement? Seriously. I've shelled out a lot of money to this school and expect something for it. Is that entitlement? I don't really think so. I'm going deeper and deeper in debt because of this situation and might possibly end up with $150K in debt and no job. I would hope that the law school I chose would help me out when others are doing the same.
Or if you want to talk about entitlement, explain to me why exactly Boalt is entitled to my donation for no reason?
TJ--The idea that you're just "keeping the word out" is immediately undercut when you mention that you're asking individual students "why they don't want to donate."
12:25--Some people have been deferred 12 months. A few of the people who have been given January 2010 start dates will probably have their offer rescinded completely during the fall. And of course, a few people have been laid off already. I'm not sure it's a sense of entitlement to be worried about health insurance.
12:29--I see your point. But the problem originates with the precedessor's negligence, no? And it's not like H!rshen has the authority to simply waive graduation requirements.
I applaud you courageous non-donators for taking the bold step of activism by default. May I suggest some further stances you audacious agents of change might consider?
-Don’t like the 1L curriculum? Just blow off your classes.
-If you’re upset with your elected reps, don’t vote.
-Upset with the school administration? Don’t bother talking with them face to face just bitch about them on this blog. That’ll show ‘em.
Read all the comments, a few good points, a few lame ones. In the end, I support public shaming. Let the people be heard. (Unfortunately, no one will bother to ask them what statement they're making and will just assume they're bitter about something.)
12:45 - it took me something like 10 attempts and you put it best. Attacking the class campaign doesn't really solve the greater issues.
11:54 - have you asked the administration what they are working on? The answer may surprise you...
Carbolic: how does it undercut anything? Isn't trying to move to a more one-on-one approach with the few stragglers something that the general population would prefer (rather than daily blast emails)? Anyone who has said they do not intend to donate on purpose has been (for the most part) left alone. But I think it's important for those who have yet to donate to make a stance and let us know either way...
Carbolic, I think what's distasteful is assailing and condemning your friends, who are thanklessly volunteering, under the cloak of your invented blogger name.
I don't mean to be insensitive, but it is most certainly a sense of entitlement if you think you *deserve* for the school to extend your health insurance or do other things to help graduating 3Ls. Would it be nice of the school to do these things? Of course. Maybe even wise, both in terms of publicity and fostering a sense of loyalty/gratitude among 3Ls (who would presumably donate more down the line).
But the school doesn't *owe* you anything beyond a degree (assuming you've earned it) and whatever continuing resources they told you to expect upfront (lifetime access to the CDO job bank, etc).
Then again, I don't think you *owe* the class campaign anything either. It makes me a little sad if you don't like this school even enough to give a little in solidarity with your classmates, but I won't say you owe it.
Donating shouldn't be about peer pressure, asterisks next to your name, rankings, or other BS. It should be about giving something back to the community we have joined, as countless others have done before us. Sure, we've just dropped a fortune for the privilege. Sure, our $5 isn't going to make a difference. Sure, we all have our gripes about this and that. But in the end, Boalt has been a terrific experience, and that's why I donated.
Carbolic - DH did the same thing with the professional responsibility requirement, which was really more of a problem with the curriculum. There is absolutely no reason everyone should have to take that class before 3L year, and DO recognized that. DH can't waive graduation requirements, but she can waive deadlines and such, and she should when her predecessor approved different deadlines.
The problem is that she does not respect students and thinks that her job is to boss us around rather than support and advocate for us. Obviously, until we graduate, we can't bring this up to the administration on anything but a blog because we would risk her wrath.
Well put Laura. Boalt promised me a degree, and I'll take it gladly. I don't remember signing a contract that they also promised me a job. I got what I paid for.
I know the economy sucks, but it sucks for everyone. And it sucks a whole lot more for plenty of people out there who won't have a JD to fall back on when things do improve. Like graduating seniors this year, or your typical GM assembly line worker.
My comment before was a bit flip and Carbolic, you are right that health insurance is a serious matter indeed. But -- we've established that UHS already has a list of resources for how to obtain short-term health insurance. I don't quite know what else to expect -- an email from DE giving us the link? Would that convince everyone he cares, and make things better? I might be wrong, but I don't think other schools are extending health insurance for free.
Taking responsibility for ourselves isn't always fun, but it's part of growing up.
Again, what does it matter if people donate or not, if it isn't a substantial amount? What does it matter if they put off their donations to a time when it's more meaningful (meaning more $$)?
1:57 - please go to DE if you feel that way. or write a letter. what "wrath" could ever be brought (assuming you're going to finish your writing requirement by graduation)? I'm being honest. you really should if you feel that strongly about it.
And what does that have to do with the class campaign? Inaction here doesn't send any message to the administration. And what's the need to "send a message" - shouldn't you "send a suggestion" and then wait for a response before you go and "send a message"?
Wow, Toney. Not to be an asshole, but if you haven't picked up on enough justifications in my prior posts, I would hate to see the reading comp score on your LSAT.
No offense taken, and I actually skipped the reading comp. portion because I thought it was optional.
But "statements" aside, do you honestly think that there's any sort of correlation between the last couple of people donating $3 and any effect on their future donations? That $3 doesn't put them in the "donating spirit". It's not going to make them any more or less likely to donate in the future. And the more you bug them, the more likely they are to refuse to donate in the future.
Further, the amount you donate now is insubstantial compared to future donations. And as someone here said, getting that 100% really left a sour taste in a lot of students' mouths. Is it worth it? If you have 20 people that haven't donated, how much are you going to get out of them.
It is tacky to public shame someone that is already $120k in debt, and indeed would very likely deter them from donating in the future.
Toney: Again (I feel like a broken record) - the big push here is to ensure that everyone knows the campaign is about to end. People that would donate still have not.
A secondary issue (which appears to be people's biggest contention) is the people who know about the deadline and choose to not donate anyway.
To sum:
1) if done to make a "point," it's not going to be as effective as simply making your point to DE right now; and
2) you should know that your "statement" is loud and clear and PUBLIC - and it goes beyond any silly asterisk in the book. That statistic is used in many forms and you're choosing to intentionally hurt it. The fact that a broke, debt-laden class with uncertain futures was able to hit 100% participation makes a HUGE statement to those alums who are 20 years out and may be thinking about whether they're going to cut back their giving this year due to the downturn.
1:50--Strong words indeed, for an anonymous poster. At least N&B readers can keep track of what I write. Not all volunteering deserves praise, particularly when it crosses the line to haranguing.
TJ--I don't know if the people who haven't contributed are doing so to criticize Boalt or not. Ultimately, however, it's irrelevant. The decision whether or not to make a symbolic contribution is a personal decision. The people who make that decision don't need to justify it to anybody. Don't get me wrong: I don't mind reminding people. But it's a step further to try to argue with people who have said "no." You're original post attempted (perhaps jokingly) to shame and "bug" non-contributors.
And also: "Not to be an asshole, but...I would hate to see the reading comp score on your LSAT." How could such a line be delivered non-assholishly? (Best adverb ever.)
1:57--Actually, I think the 2L ethics requirement is justifiable. Most students effectively begin their legal careers between 2L and 3L years. Summer associates aren't really expected to fully understand jurisdiction or successor liability. But violating professional ethics would be a big (potentially career-ending) problem.
In any case, the decision to institute that requirement is made by the faculty, not the dean. Still, maybe I just never had a bad interaction with DH. I also hadn't taken ethics before 3L year, but I didn't get yelled at or anything; what would be the point? I took it last semester instead.
Haha- it couldn't be delivered non-assholishly. I knew I was being an asshole and hence I noted it.
But that was less Toney's particular fault and more the fact he did something that I find generally annoying - when people ask at the end of a long comment post a question that has already been answered further up the post (arguably only because they didn't want to have to sift through the whole thing...).
This email was sent to Harvard 3Ls who have already contributed to their class gift:
Dear Classmates,
I am writing to THANK YOU for your participation in the Class Gift and to ask for your help in boosting the participation rate farther.
A record 266 members of the Class of 2009 have already given to the Gift, many of you in response to the section-based effort that just ended, and resulting in the participation rates at the bottom of this e-mail**. However, the more important set of data is how the Class’s current overall participation rate—44%—compares with our counterparts’ efforts at other law schools (2008 figures). As you can see below, we have a way to go to rival them:
Berkeley/Boalt 95%
Columbia 83%
Northwestern 81%
Stanford 80%
Yale 74%
U. Penn. 73%
We mean to do what we can before graduation to make sure that the Class of 2009 shows its support for HLS and for the improvements Elena Kagan has brought to it. A high participation rate will demonstrate to prospective donors, faculty, and students that, even in this difficult economic period, we are pleased with the choice we made to attend HLS.
Accordingly, I invite all of you that have already demonstrated your commitment to this important effort to consider making it even more successful, by helping others decide to give. The time commitment would be small, since we all have exams coming up. There will be a meeting to discuss plans for the remaining stages of the Class Gift this Wednesday 4/29, 12-1 PM, about which I will send details to anyone interested--just respond to this e-mail saying so. If you cannot be involved but have thoughts or suggestions, please send those along as well.
And, finally, please encourage others to consider participating in the Class Gift--which, with your help, promises to be a very positive reflection on HLS in general and the Class of 2009 in particular!
With best wishes, and many thanks,
T-----
** SECTION PARTICIPATION RATES (up to and including gifts given by 4/20)
Section 7: 80.0%
Transfers: 71.4%
Section 6: 71.2%
Section 1: 38.2%
Section 2: 37.5%
Section 5: 29.1%
Section 3: 27.6%
Section 4: 26.6%
my undergrad had the same drama on this issue. i'm having weird dejavu as i wait to graduate.
res ipsa loquitur!
TJ, it's not that I didn't read your posts. It's that I wanted to double check your generally witless torpor, which makes even the dumbest of us blush. Oh, not be assholish.
This is a bit unrelated, but since there were comments about health insurance above and 3Ls might read this, I thought I'd pass on a little heads up. I was down at UHS refilling a Rx and saw a flier. Maybe my head is in the clouds, but the info came as a surprise to me. Apparently, after graduation, once we aren't registered students anymore, UHS will become more expensive for us. Even though our health insurance technically continues until August 14, after May 26, we aren't eligible to use UHS as students anymore. So, in case you were thinking of taking care of medical stuff or refiling prescriptions, etc. while studying for the bar, apparently it will be more expensive after 5/26. I would've thought they'd be more forthcoming with this warning, but I did find a link that has the info. http://uhs.berkeley.edu/home/news/summerbreak.shtml
Wow, thanks Maggie. There is also information on health insurance that you can purchase after SHIP expires in August, just as an fyi.
A little birdie suggested to me that you may want to wait for official word from the law school (specifically) before you go and start buying health insurance, etc. Give it a couple days.
And, Toney: that's quite a cute, thesaurus-enhanced equivalent of "no, you're a stupidhead!" Way to knock that one out of the park...
In light of today's SCOTUS decision on fleeting expletives, I think I may have to institute a fine whenever co-bloggers use "stupidhead."
Now you two stupid-heads need to kiss and makeup. Otherwise, I'll post 30 Rock clips featuring the Slanket.
Torpor? Come on! That was one of Asimov's favorite words. I suspect you'd have a very tough time finding it in a thesaurus (by reference, not by index).
And, Armen, that 30 rock episode had me in tears. The show has quite literally evolved from "funny" to "priceless national treasure". Isn't there a slanket somewhere you should be filling with your farts?
No harm, no foul.
As a token of good faith, I've submitted the first donation to the Class of 2010 campaign - in Toney's name!
I'm not donating to the Class of 2010 Campaign. So don't bug me about it.
Thanks Matt, you're a real asset to have around.
You too, anonymous. Every last one of you.
I'm going to be very anti-establishment here, and say that I appreciate anon commenters. They can say things that the bloggers may want to say, but can't, because the internet is not a private place.
That said, sometimes the anon sniping gets old. Substance good, flame bad.
McWho, you, too, are an asset. And a gentleman.
In this case, however, I wouldn't have minded saying it:
"Thanks Matt, you're a real asset to have around."
Returning briefly to the line of discussion about whether the school owes its graduates anything...
While I don't know if the schools actually owes us anything beyond a degree, I think the proper thing would be to do everything in the school's power to support graduating students. Not just for rankings or alumni $$$, but because this seems like should be part of the overall mission of this professional school.
Below is an example of a school that is working to help its graduates, despite the fact that this work may not show up in the amlaw rankings.
http://abovethelaw.com/2009/04/boston_college_loyola_-_chicag.php
Not to sound like a broken record, but it seems clear to me the single overwhelming motivating factor for anything Boalt does is rankings, and I think that is ridiculous.
it seems clear to me the single overwhelming motivating factor for anything Boalt does is rankings, and I think that is ridiculous.I don't think this is entirely true. If it were, wouldn't our average gpa and lsat scores be higher?
GPA has always been high, LSAT has increased dramatically in the past few years. To put it in perspective, 167 used to be the 75th percentile, now it's more around 50th.
Re: UHS and SHIP Insurance...
I think you should double check your information. I used my insurance and went to the Tang Center the entire summer after I graudated (I was studying for the bar in Berkeley) and had no problems and my rates/co-pay didn't go up. In fact, I went to Tang without problem (or increased fees) following the July '08 bar after coming down with what was probably the first unreported case of the Swine Flu in the US on day 2 of the bar exam...
Any news on the Boalt front re: insurance? TJ, I think you said we should wait a couple of days?
Making me out to be a liar. I say hold on another day, then throw a shit fit if we don't hear anything by this weekend.
Forget about health insurance. What about my rock-hard abs? Does anyone know if we still get to use RSF during the summer?
Great question anon, why don't you google that and let us all know!?
re: health insurance / lrap, etc
plan is done, but not voted upon yet. we shall see when they get around to that (as well as letting us know)...
I spoke with the insurance office at Tang today and they confirmed that our costs to use Tang after graduation will not increase. So, for example, prescriptions will still cost $25.
They said non-continuing and graduating students can use Tang on a "fee-for -services" basis.
12:16 here. 4:03, I think we always used Tang on a fee-for-service basis. They specifically told me that prescriptions would cost $25 (which is what I pay now), and things like going to the lab or seeing a specialist would cost 20% of the regular price (which is what I pay now). So my understanding is that prices aren't going to go up once we graduate.
I am soooo sick of all you deferred big firm people whining about your lack of health insurance. Thankfully I am not one of them, but there are a number of people at this school who seriously have NO JOBS. We will be making 160K in a few months (i.e. a few months after the bar); others are getting paid 75K to go do whatever the hell we want for a year! Be a little freaking sensitive to people who are graduating with no prospects and competing for 40K a year jobs.
And I'm sick of people who choose to enter a highly competitive field that pays $40k, while having their tuition and loans subsidized by fellow students, complain about their situation.
Is that because Tang only gives us 20% the service of a usual doctor?
To Anonymous 6:49 AM
The people I am thinking of are not those who necessarily "chose" a 40K job. I am thinking of people who are looking for ANY damn job -- public interest, firm, gvmt or otherwise, who, come August 1st, may have no source of income and no health insurance. AND FYI: LRAP DOESN'T COVER YOU IF YOU ARE JOBLESS.
To 6:49 AM
If you are going into a 40K job that is going to help lots of people, trees, animals, etc., then your tuition absolutely SHOULD be subsidized by those who are selling their souls to the devil. Otherwise, there would be no public interest law, and I'm sure that even a greedy capitalist like yourself wouldn't dare to suggest that? Besides, your big firm salaries wouldn't exist without public interest lawyers. Just think -- without the abused employees and chopped-down trees, there would be no one suing the big corporations, hence no business for you!
9:21 - I sincerely hope you're kidding.
May I be the first to congratulate 9:21 for their quintessential Berkeley post. Good luck with your struggle to emancipate the proletariat from the safe confines of this city.
1130- You mean all the big firm students who will be starting at $145k.
That's the great insurance plan? To have us look at a Tang flyer? Should we expect anything else from Boalt or will this be it?
Post a Comment
<< Home