Archives for the month of: October, 2015

A dream I had:

Me:  Hey, Colleague, do you mind erasing the dry-erase board after you finish teaching?  I have class after you.

Colleague: Actually, there is some discussion in the literature about who is the most efficient person to erase the board.  If you are after me, you may or may not use the board.  So it makes sense that the entering professor wipes the board clean.

Me: Did it account for the informational barriers it will create for my students who will be distracted by what you have on the board?

Colleague: I believe they accounted for that.

Me: Did it account for the five minutes out of every class I’m going to use to ridicule what you wrote on the board, including its instructional merit, your penmanship, and your marker color choice?

Colleague: No.

Me: Okay.  That’s good for now.  Next week we can talk about putting the caps back on the markers and putting them back on the board ledge.


How to deal with exams.  Via Above the Law.

I’ve written on law porn several times.  Today, on Above the Law.

Also, my grandmotherly reply to some law porn.

And finally, a contest for best law school porn.

Does this make me an expert in law school marketing?

The people you might encounter on your job talk, and how to deal with them.  Via Above the Law.

(Somewhat) helpful advice from me on Above the Law.

For those of you traveling to AALS Faculty Recruitment conference next week to interview candidates, it is important to find ways to articulate, in a non-hypocritical fashion, how much you hate the candidate’s scholarship.

There’s just one problem: The candidate is a lot like you.

No worries!  I have some language that will still allow you to boast about your accomplishments while crushing the candidate’s hopes and dreams.

Your article: Published in prestigious journal

Theirs: Student editors can’t be trusted.

Your article: I’m a prolific author

Theirs: Quantity suggests something negative about quality

Yours: My reviewers said I was amazing

Theirs: Candidate’s reviewers were biased

Yours: The editors were responsible for the footnotes

Theirs: I found a typo! Candidate is a careless writer

Yours: Beyond the scope of the article

Theirs: Candidate failed to consider obvious paths

Yours: I publish in specialty journals

Theirs: Candidate can’t publish in traditional law reviews

Yours:   I publish in peer-reviewed journals

Theirs:   Candidate likely will have trouble getting tenure in a law school

With a little practice, your colleagues will still think as highly of you as they already do, and you’ll be able to destroy candidates that you don’t like.  Good luck!