New Academic Calendar Announced

Well, folks, it seems that Boalt got a little change we can believe in with the new OCI schedule combined with a new class schedule.

Somehow, we kept the 14 weeks of classes, but lost the week of Fall Break. Classes will start August 24th, which is later than normal and the semester ends December 16th, which is about the same. I can't remember how many reading days we have now, but we have 3 in this new calendar.

The Spring semester looks about the same and is too boring to really consider at this point.

Oh, and your future nebulous concerns will be address, from M*ndi's email (really an email forwarded by M*ndi and written by Prof. R*bert M*rg*s, co-Chair, Faculty Curriculum Committee, but I know who y'all want to hear from):

At the Dean's direction, the Berkeley Law staff is working hard to implement this change. Some areas of crucial concern have already been addressed; others will be dealt with as they arise. The BHSA will continue to be included in these conversations as we move forward. You will receive more information about the schedule change and its implications in the coming months.

I assume people will complain about this because it's law school. So, have at it.

BHSA Town Hall -- the Liveblog

50 minutes and counting until the fun starts. Two live blogs in two days this week folks, get excited.

12:44: BURRITOS?! Hurray!
12:45: About 25 people here, including B*ll Fr*edman -- the oldest person in the world
12:46: Hmm, mostly 2Ls in here, some 3Ls, some stranger danger.
12:47: Wise observation from my handsome lady neighbor, "Room full of people who got roped into doing funding for their organization." I know I'm cursing that decision ...
12:49: M*ndi! Looking excited as always, sitting in the jury box. I pity the fool of a counsel who ever let her get past voir dire.
12:50: Oh sh*t, it's starting and I haven't finished my burrito
12:51: We're doing curriculum committee and GA funding, I assume we're doing GA funding second b/c they don't want EVERYONE to leave after the funding part
12:52: T*ny and D*n from curriculum. T*ny is awesome, he gets my vote for student rep of the year
12:53: They are talking about faculty development - they want round tables (no more square tables!). My attention is divided between this and my burrito. Burrito is winning.
12:55: Any thoughts on how teacher's could get better? Let T*ny know! Also, they'll be sending around a survey monkey who will be asking a couple of really simple questions. See the monkey, answer his questions.
12:57: Hm, we want 1Ls to feel MORE comfortable with talking in class -- that seems like the exact opposite of how I remember 1L -- and by 1L I obviously mean BizAss
1:00: And M*ndi FTW: "How much buy-in do you have from faculty? Do they really want to change? ..."
1:01: She is astounded by the questions she gets asked by adjuncts -- like, "how do I grade?"
1:02: FILL OUT YOUR STUDENT EVALS OR DIE!!!! Especially the student-to-student part.
1:03: On a similar note, did anyone else note that only 38% of eligible SF county voters voted in the midterms? At least folks got this voting right: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fc%2Fa%2F2010%2F11%2F15%2FSPNM1GCC6I.DTL
1:04: D*n's got a bit of a mustache going on -- I wonder if it's for Movember (http://www.movember.com/) or just for hipster cred (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/books/review/Greif-t.html?pagewanted=2&_r=2&ref=books)
1:08: oh, IMPORTANT note: Professors DO NOT have access to your reviews until ALL of their final grades are in. So, nothing you say will be held against you in grading.
1:10: This is boring, I'm bored
1:15: OKAY, FUNDING STUFF. I'm already confused. There is a board that looks like 1L civ pro w/ Trist*n Gr**n
1:16: M*nica is explaining the history of funding cuts last semester; we have a new method this semester; grad students are divided into super groups; we are law super group (and, now I'm embarrassed). Our money is minimized b/c of this super group stuff. It will effect round 3 funding.
1:18: Note, resolution 1009d happened this summer -- it was based on last year's participation or this summer's when we were at work.
1:19: Good question from the audience, "what are we doing now?" Answer: we are trying to have a voice in committees but right now everyone hates us at the GA b/c we caused such drama earlier
1:20: We are thinking about just pulling out of the GA (that's what she said?) but this is a big process and would take a ton of time to think through it
1:24: Who's the quiet handsome guy up at the front? Is that what 1Ls look like now, and if so, why haven't I been going to bar review
1:25: Okay, you may be able to supplement your GMER (general GA funding) with some of the grants and special GA funding. I'm pretty sure this is all on the GAs website though. Q from audience: can't we just make the admin cover the difference, at least now? A: hmmm
1:29: I think we might really be talking about money right now. There are four funding awards: 1) GMER (food) not merit based; 2) Grants (1 per semester in one of three categories) has some merit; 3) Travel; and 4) Contingency: this is for emergency exciting events and software.
1:32: They're sending out a sheet with all the info we need; and a couple people will be having office hours to help treasurers. I'm officially redundant. And ... PETCH OUT.
1:34: One last thing: DO NOT GO OVER ANY OF THE AMOUNTS OR YOU WILL NOT GET ANY FUNDING

Some Great Course Evaluation News

If you are a student, you just received an email announcing that from here foreword - and subject to conditions - the 'narrative' portion of professors evaluations will be available students. About freaking time. Huge props to the students who pulled this off (I know it was not easy), although I do have one question about the email.

First, read this:

This year, our faculty advocates on the Curriculum Committee have approved a great change in course evaluations! Previously, students could only see aggregated numerical ratings (e.g., "Rate Professor X on a scale form 1 to 5") and not responses to narrative questions (e.g., "What could Professor X do better?"). However, this year, the responses to narrative questions will be made available online to the student body with password protected access. There's just one catch. In order for your answers to a particular narrative question to be made available to your fellow students, at least 50% of the students enrolled in this course must also respond to that particular question.

BHSA is asking that all students complete every question on the evaluations and remain polite and civil in our answers so that we are able to post them on the website. This new feature will give us all access through Berkeley Law's website to primary source information about student experiences with professors. We hope that you are excited about this and do your best to make it successful.

Doesn't the first sentence of the second paragraph sort of suggest that, while narratives will be posted, not *all* narratives will be posted? Who gets to decide what constitutes "civil"? Who gets to set the boundaries for what is considered "polite"? I hope it's not the professor.

Again, though, this is great work by some very dedicated 3L's. I'm not going to benefit from this, but it makes me very happy all the same.

Students: fill out your course evals here.

Choose Your Own Adventure: Voting Can Make You Less Douchey (If You Do It Right)

START >> You wake up on the floor of your apartment, coming off a Peeps-induced sugar high from the night before, and realize that BHSA elections are upon us…

CHAPTER 1: Deciding Whether to Vote

A) Vote?! Haha. You are a jaded law student. Do you really think BHSA does anything? Do you really think if you voted, your vote would count? Do you even believe that we co-exist in anything but a purely solipsistic universe of one mind and infinite illusion?? Of course not. You eat a bowl of Cap’n Crunch and decide to zone out from all this BHSA crap for the rest of the week. [JUMP TO CH. 4A!]

B) Can voting count as my exercise for the week? In any case, sure – I’ll vote. [MOVE TO CH. 2!]

CHAPTER 2: Due Diligence

A) Thank goodness your student group told you who to vote for. Now all you have to do is show up, cast a ballot for your cause, and all will be well. [JUMP TO CH. 4B!]

B) You go to the candidate speeches event today at 12:45 in room 105. [MOVE TO CH. 3!]

C) You do independent research by talking to the candidates, visiting their facebook groups, and reading their candidate statements before voting. [JUMP TO CH. 4C!]

D) You have heard rumors. Dark, scary rumors of collusion, fascism, and porn… lots of porn. You will not vote for Porninators. [JUMP TO CH. 4D!]

CHAPTER 3: Critical Analysis

A) You eat some free pizza and play USA Today’s crossword puzzle. What is a 5-letter word for “Where pies are feet”?? Oops – meeting is over. [JUMP TO CH. 4A!]

B) You listen intently as the candidates babble about LRAP. Are you scared about LRAP? We will make sure LRAP is okay. Under my watch, LRAP is like baby Jesus in his manger, surrounded by incense and fluffy barn animals. You absorb this information and feel prepared to vote. [JUMP TO CH. 4E!]

C) You listen to the speeches, and then get your cross-examination on! “Oh, you want to protect the LRAP, do you?? I dare you to DESCRIBE the current state of our LRAP.” I’m like a CEO hiring you to be my spokesperson next year – so you better be friggin amazing. [JUMP TO CH. 4F!]

CHAPTER 4: Conclusion

A) Congratulations! You’ve earned unlimited free rides on the Waaaaahmbulance next year any time you express dissatisfaction with LRAP / student fees / construction / etc. You are part of the student body – as such, you are represented by the BHSA. If you renounce any part in helping to shape that body of leaders, or do so in a half-assed manner, then you have lost your right to complain. You are: HYPOCRITE DOUCHE!

B) All of a sudden, it gets very cold. You have one brain cell, and look for another so you can rub them together and create a spark. ALAS! You do not have two brain cells to rub together. You do as you’re told without inquiring further: Would other candidates serve my cause just as well, or better? Just because they haven’t been hand-selected by my student group, does that mean they’re against my student group? Or does it just mean that sometimes politics at Boalt are not unlike a cartel? So many questions – so difficult to answer without doing some original thinking. You are: AUTOMATON DOUCHE!

C) You have no appetite for rhetoric, but are responsible nonetheless. Congratulations!! Your doucheyness has substantially decreased. You are: PARAGON OF CIVIC RESPONSIBILITY!

D) Oh no! You’re an idiot. Don’t you know by now that rumors at Boalt are 40% lies, 40% exaggeration, 15% lack of sex, and 5% caffeine high?? You’d be better off not voting than voting based on misinformation. You are: SUPER DOUCHE!!

E) Nice try, but you have only marginally decreased your douchyness with this attempt. There are lots of reasons why a law student might want to be on BHSA – among them, prestige, power, resume-building… but also a desire to lead, to change the status quo, to fairly represent their peers. You can’t fairly determine which motives are driving a candidate until you ask the tough questions – that means not letting them get away with the same stupid babble. You are: EARNEST DOUCHE!

F) Surprisingly, despite your apparent red hotness, you are less douchey than most! Elections are one example of a time when aggressive inquisitiveness is appropriate. Congratulations, you are: INTELLIGENT CONSTITUENT!

END >> Vote on Weds/Thurs in the Donor Lobby from 10am-2pm.

BHSA Rep Proposes Edley No Confidence Vote

In a week filled with good ideas, this might be the best one yet.

You might know Dean Edley as the guy behind Boalt's rise in the rankings, the Summer Fellowship Program or the architect of the best LRAP program in the country. I guess one of the 1L BHSA reps was too busy reading memos because the representative in question apparently suggested the BHSA hold a vote of "no confidence" on Edley at last night's meeting. The idea, also apparently, didn't go over well.

Seems like someone caught strike fever.

Anyone want to defend this position? This makes me wonder what other bullshit goes on at BHSA meetings.

A Sort of Boalt Confirmation Hearing

Unless you're up to your eyeballs in the bar exam, you probably saw Mindi's email on behalf of BHSA soliciting applications for six student slots on the Faculty Appointments Committee.

I'd encourage anyone who is interested to do it. And I encourage anyone who does it to find out from prospective candidates: "If hired, would you make the narrative portions of your teaching evaluations available to students?"

----

Slight Update: An anonymous commentator noted the recent email explaining that classes with fewer than 12 enrolled students will be cancelled, for budgetary reasons. (The same email also stated that a new course section on "Critical Race Theory" would be opened. *cough*.) I think it's a real bummer that we are losing smaller sections, although it's probably also unavoidable. I also think students should realize the importance of tactical enrollment: this is NOT the semester to enroll in Construction Law (which currently has 10 enrolled students) late, after the first week of classes. Rather, this is the semester to enroll early, sample, and then cut the fat later. Just my two cents.

Survey Number 988978655

[Update: Just saw this. Un-freaking-believable. Great minds think alike.]

----------------

If you are a 2L or a 3L you recently received an e-mail asking to you fill out a survey on what can be done to improve the online teaching evaluation process. Since you probably deleted it as a matter of course, I posted in the comments.

No ill will intented to BHSA for conducting the survey, but the problem with the evaluations is stunningly simple, and has been kicked around on this blog for years. It's no mystery: because the school doesn't share any meaningful survey results, they're worthless to students. Absolutely worthless. Many of us went to colleges where the process was much more transparent, and when we asked DE a town hall last year what could be done to improve the evaluation process here, DO stepped in and explained that "the faculty are opposed" to further disclosure. That was that. Discussion over. Issue closed. Now that "response rates have been declining," though, they are apparently interested in our feedback.

Stepping off the moral high horse, there are lots of practical reasons students should encourage releasing the narratives of student evaluations. Which professor has threatened to ban laptops? Which professor takes attendance like it's God's work? Which professor buys his pants a size down and stands in the lecture halls with one leg on the podium? We need to know ahead of time! We need to KNOW!

I encourage you use the survey to remind the school that the current evaluation process is, at a bare minimum, mildly insulting to the sudden body, and to point out how easy it would be to turn things around. I also encourage you not to hold your breath for significant change, although I would love to be proven wrong.

Lockergate '08 or How BHSA Finally Realized What Its Job Is

I'm guessing you've all received BHSA's e-mail regarding the locker situation (posted after the jump). Looks like we're gonna have a good ol' fashioned standoff with the admin! Everyone who cares about this issue, make sure you stop by the Laub Lobby to sign their petition. While there, you can sign my petition to officially rename the Laub Lobby the "Bob Loblaw Laub Lobby."

Now the more important question: Should anyone care? I recently discussed the locker situation with a friend, and she shared some interesting insights. First, she said (reasonably) the locker fees were minimal. Second, a fee is a good way to preserve a scarce resource. Third, due to the prominence of online and used book exchanges, the BHSA is strapped for cash, which it (presumably) uses to make us all happier. Thus, 1) the locker fee is a reasonably good idea; and 2) it's so small that no one should care. She conceded one could argue against them based purely on principle, but in a world with so much more to care about, why would you?

My friend makes some very good points. The locker fee would have been a good source of funds for an organization we all should support. In fact, now that the fees are gone, I plan to make a $25 donation to it just because. Hopefully others will do the same. Second, the fee was small. And it does seem kind of ridiculous that, after all we've been put through this year, the fight we're going to pick with the administration is over $25 a person.

But I still maintain this is a good thing. Even though the issue is somewhat silly, I was a little touched by BHSA's e-mail. I mean, for once the student organization heard the students' voices and is now going to amplify them to the administration. Isn't that their job, even if what the voices are saying is kind of dumb? Moreover, this is a fight we'll likely win. I doubt the administration is going to risk alienating the student body over something as small as a couple hundred lockers. Hell, they can even put them in the Hearst Annex just to shut us up. It's where problems go to die! Yes, it's likely this petition will succeed. And even though that victory is small, it would be a soothing balm over the wounds caused by constant construction, the end of the BBB, changing administration, eviction from our offices, the vanishing of that pleasant smell that used to radiate from the trees (mmm!), etc.

A locker is a small luxury, and winning them will be a small victory. But at this point, I think we could all use one. Cheers to BHSA for helping us out.

Lockergate 2008

BHSA and the school administration have broken their silence and sent an update on the locker situation [posted in full after the jump].

Included in the plan is mandatory locker sharing and charging a rental fee for 3Ls.

Any thoughts?

More Bookbuying Woes

I noticed that the text for the Exempt Organization Seminar is egregiously expensive. The Law of Tax-Exempt Organizations, 8th ed. (ISBN 0471268208) is currently offered in the Boalt Bookstore at $187.50 for a used copy. This is the most expensive assigned text I have even seen. If anyone else is taking this class (and there can't be too many of you) I suggest you check out the Amazon Marketplace listings, where there are a few used copies around $20, and some new ones for $70.

UPDATE: The professor of the Exempt Organization Seminar was so appalled at the price of the assigned text that he decided to not require it for the course.

It's no secret that the bookstore here at Boalt (run by Ned's Books, not the university) is consistently the most expensive place to buy casebooks. Students are encouraged to buy our books at the Boalt store because there is a slight kickback of profits to BHSA. In fact, the Boalt administration is so invested in ensuring that students overpay for their casebooks at Ned's Books that it intentionally releases the list of assigned texts only one or two business days before classes start, in order to make online ordering difficult. Most students then end up going to the Boalt bookstore because they want to have their books in hand before classes start in order to do the first day's reading - as it is hard to find an online retailer who will deliver a Friday order to you by Sunday without charging an egregious shipping fee (buying directly from Amazon, especially if you have Amazon Prime, is an exception to this).

When the difference is only $10 per casebook it's hard for me to justify the hassle and wait of ordering online, but more often then not, the price difference is much greater (especially if you use services like half.com, ebay, or Amazon Marketplace - all of which can be searched simultaneously by ISBN through a website like akabook).

Ned's Books has what it believes is a captive market (again, assisted by Boalt administration) and therefor has no motivation to offer a competitive price. The best solution I have found so far is to make all my casebook purchases at Ned's Books, then order the same books online, then return the read, but unmarked Ned's Books casebooks when my discount books arrive (usually a few days before the return deadline). Also, instructors typically decide on their casebooks early, and will tell you what they are if you email them in advance.

Yes, I'm Jewish (insert cultural stereotype here).

PS - If anyone else has encountered any particularly egregious instances of price-gouging by Ned's Books feel free to post it in the comments area. Also, I welcome any arguments about why students should consciously overpay for our casebooks.


-----
[And, Patrick wonders: do I really need to buy the WOA reader? I didn't even touch the LRW reader.]

Show me the Money

The discussion below regarding the markup on textbooks sold here at Boalt to fund the BHSA had me thinking for quite some time. I must confess, at the time of this writing, I have more questions than answers. But these are my general thoughts. And I must warn, I am likely to get a wee bit technical given my more than passive interest in student group funding. [Quick refresher: Boalt does not release textbook information in advance, forcing us to buy books at the bookstore. So the bookstore sells textbooks at a markup, which funds the student groups here.]

Just from a subjective/normative perspective, I am almost completely opposed to the use of textbook markup to support BHSA. More accurately, I am opposed to the school having policies that force us to use the bookstore so that they can get the extra money for BHSA. There is a fundamental sense of fairness that the school is violating. Call it hyperbole, but I feel like I'm a member of the Communist Party or something (no vote, just join). None of this is to suggest anything negative about the BHSA or all the other student groups. I don't intend this to be a post that criticizes them and likewise I don't want any comments about how great they are...I'm taking that as a given, and I believe it to boot. But, the school has decided to fund those groups in a way that has NO student decision in the matter to the best of my knowledge. This is problematic.

Throughout the University of California, Student Bar Associations (the equivalents of BHSA), and other student associations, are funded through mandatory fees approved by referenda. The problem with Boalt's procedure is that it avoids the label of a mandatory fee, and avoids any University regulation as such. See UC Policy 80.00 et seq (compulsory contributions) and 90.00 et seq (voluntary contributions). These policies exist largely to comply with SCOTUS rulings on viewpoint neutrality and other First Amendment issues with respect to the use of student fees. See, e.g., Rosenberger v. Univ. of VA, 515 U.S. 819; Board of Regents v. Southworth, 529 U.S. 217; and this excerpt from a Justice Stevens concurrence as quoted on the VC is also worthwhile. The gist of these cases is that as long as the funds are distributed without any regard to the viewpoints expressed by the organizations, then they are generally presumed valid, even if compulsory. But they require some sort of a referendum procedure to ensure fairness (I haven't shephardized Southworth to really know the precise requirements here). That's where the UC policies come in. I'm not making some sort of a Constitutional argument here, but it is the best way to ensure that all student views are respected, and our funds are taken and used according to rules and regs previously established. Whenever there is a policy that circumvents other clearly laid out policies and favors sneakiness over openness, I'm suspect. Glasnost I say.

In the end, I think this is also in BHSA's own self interest. Hypothetically, let's assume the current take is $10,000. And assuming a student body of 1000, that's about $10 a student (doubt it, but it's a hypo). Even a referendum for $11 in compulsory student fees will of course generate more funds. It's easy to play around with fake numbers, but combine this with advance notice of textbooks (allowing us to bargain hunt) and you can see how it will lead to a far better result for both the BHSA and the student body here. Compulsory fees can also be raised with future referenda should the need arise. I'm also not opposed to part of those fees funding student services such as the bookstore, etc.

Although I think the Uni is not obligated to have any form of a refund procedure, I think the policies do allow individual campuses to establish one. I think it's fair to have one if someone disagrees with how those moneys are spent. I doubt more than a handful of Boalties will exercise that options, but still, it's better than the current IRS wage garnishing scheme the school's running.

Book to the Future

For the past year and a half, I had casually assumed that the reason we were not told in advance which books a professor will use in class was because of the technological inadequacies of Berkeley. But word from the Grapevine is that D.O. specifically told a student that they don't release the names of the books in advance to get us to buy the books from the Boalt bookstore.

As much I love to subsidize this school, I think this is probably one of the biggest transgressions on the part of the school against its students. Let me explain. On the macro level, I'm always suspect of anything that intentionally deprives me of choice. Yes, this liberal even applies that to all areas even though I think such a depravation is warranted in areas such as primary and secondary education. But this is not some overarching social program. It's just thuggish behavior on the part of the school. "Oh you want protection? We'll give you protection if you buy our goods." [replace "protection" with "legal education"].

On a more micro level, the school is royally fucking over its students. And I really hope Dean Edley and other administrators and/or faculty are reading this. Here is how the school's policy affects us. First, there is only a miniscule opportunity to purchase books below the listed price because the student store carries about as many used textbooks as the fingers on my right hand. And I'm not from Chernobyl. The reason for this is a vicious cycle. We can't purchase our books from online outlets such as Amazon or Half.com, but we're more than welcome to sell there. These outlets of course fetch better prices than the cookie crumbs the bookstore offers. I suspect the few Boalt students who are inclined to selling their books either find ways of directly selling to students using the beautiful flyering you see in the lockerroom or they sell online. I just haven't heard of anyone selling back to the bookstore. The important point is that the effect of this is to force us to pay the maximum price for our books. Some of us are independently wealthy. Most of us are not. With the strict budget allowance, I think it's essentially disgusting that the school would deprive its students the opportunity to bargain hunt and maybe save a few precious loan dollars for an extra cup of coffee during the 84-hour sleep deprived study-thon at the noise depot that is the Reading Room.

I have a few ideas, some serious, some not. For example, at the UCLA store website, you can access your list of books for a quarter based on your SID and last name. Similarly, you can see the books a class uses by clicking on textbook at that course's listing. UCLA law does not work any differently. While UCLA law is not a part of this system, they at least list the textbooks ahead of time online. I think professors should be mindful of the school's policy and e-mail the book(s) they intend to use in class ahead of time to those enrolled or waitlisted. Students can and should e-mail the professors ahead of time to get this information. I know that the Big Rakowski sent an e-mail with the textbook info for Tax II. Anyway, I'm fairly pissed off that the school would intentionally try to swindle its students. Am I a kook for being this pissed off?