Archives for category: Uncategorized

(sung to tune “Music of the Night,” Phantom of the Opera).

Night time sharpens, heightens each sensation
Darkness wakes and stirs star pagination
Silently work’s senses abandon their defenses
Helpless to resist the class notes I write
For I am a composed law student of the night

Slowly, gently night class unfurls it’s splendor
Grasp it, sense it, coffee in a tumbler
Studying is believing, work can be deceiving
We work Hard as lightening, read by candlelight
You can trust the law students of the night

Close your eyes as your prof seeks to tell his truth
and the prof isn’t what you want to see
In the dark it is easy to pretend
That 8 hours of sleep is what it ought to be

Softly, deftly, the law shall caress you
hear it, fear it, secretly possess you
Open up your mind, let your outlines unwind
In this darkness which you know you must try to fight
The darkness of the reading of the night

Close your eyes, and you’ll start a journey to a strange new world
Leave all thoughts of the world you knew before
Close your eyes and get the sleep you need
Three hours later, more reading (I’m on call, you see?)

Floating, falling, sweet intoxication
Friday, Sigh day, savor each libation
But then Saturday begins, your darker side gives in
To the power of the course outline that you must write
The power of the law student of the night

I alone can make the final take flight
I am a law student of the night

 

Advertisements

Thinking about this as I think about law review submissions:

“Wherever the circumstances or traditions of life lead to an habitual comparison of one person with another in point of efficiency, the instinct of workmanship works out in an emulative or invidious comparison of persons. …In any community where such an invidious comparison of persons is habitually made, visible success becomes an end sought for its own utility as a basis of esteem. Esteem is gained and dispraise is avoided by putting one’s efficiency in evidence.”

*Sung to tune Hotel California by the Eagles

In a dark deserted library, cool AC in my hair

Warm smell of avocado toast, rising up through the air

Up ahead in the distance, I saw a shimmering light

My head grew heavy and my sight grew dim

I had to stop studying for the night.

 

The Barbri rep stood in the doorway;

I heard the elevator bell

And I was thinking to myself

‘The Cal Bar could be heaven or it could be Hell’

Then she lit up a video and she showed me the way

There were voices down the corridor,

I thought I heard them say

 

Welcome to the Bar Exam in California

Such a lovely place (such a lovely place)

Such a lovely pace.

Plenty of room at the Bar Exam in California

Two times per year (two times per year) you can find us here

 

Her mind is Tiffany-twisted, she’s the rep Barbri sends

She got a lot of pretty, Barbri books, she shares with friends

How they cry in the courtyard, sweet summer sweat

Some cry “I can’t remember,” some cry “I must not forget.”

 

So I called up the Barbri Rep,

‘Please let this be my last time’

She said, ‘we haven’t had such a low bar passage rate here since the beginning of time’

And still those voices are calling from far away,

Wake you up in the middle of the night

Just to hear them say”

 

Welcome to the Bar Exam in California

Such a lovely place (such a lovely place)

Such a lovely pace.

They livin’ it up at the Bar in California

What a bad surprise (what a bad surprise), a rejection letter lullaby

 

Staring at the ceiling,

The double latte on ice

A bar prepper said, ‘we are all just prisoners here, of our own device’

And in the Cal Supreme Court chambers,

They gathered for a feast

They could have stabbed it with their steely knives,

But they decided not to kill this beast

 

Last thing I remember, I was

Running for the border

I had to find the bar passage rate that had a better scorer

‘Relax’ said the Barbri rep,

‘Cal Bar is programmed to deceive.

You can’t pass any time you like,

But you can always leave!’

When you’ve been in this business long enough, every movie plot sounds like something you’ve experienced or seen.  Here’s a sample:

The Devil Wears Prada – Delightful story about what it is like to be a secretary to a law school faculty member.

Lawrence of Arabia – Newbie Dean tries to unite a factional faculty.

Apocalypse Now – Story of a faculty candidate attempting to engage in curriculum reform, put up against a more senior faculty member.

Gladiator – Story of a faculty member who was a favorite of the old dean.  The old dean is ousted.  Under the new evil dean, our hero is forced to do battle with faculty members until he is able to oust the evil dean.

Hidden Figures – The story of a group of admissions staff having to battle faculty and a dean to successfully bring in a entering class for U.S. News Rankings purposes.  Ultimately, they get no credit.

Wonder Woman – Story of an embattled female dean who eventually has to take on her Provost while a group of white men naysay her the whole way.  I’ve written about this before.

Dead Poet’s Society – Story of a professor who teaches subjects in a manner that violates ABA rules, despite emphasis on experiential learning. Also, he’s later denied tenure despite stellar teaching evaluations.

The Martian – Story of the isolation everyone who has written a dissertation feels.

Hunger Games – I don’t need to tell you. It’s about faculty hiring.

Psycho – story of that one faculty member who seemed normal until he got tenure.

Full Metal Jacket – the first portion of the movie is about an abusive associate dean and a new faculty member the associate dean didn’t want hired.

V for Vendetta – Story of that one faculty member who cares about faculty governance in a school where the faculty…don’t.

The Wizard of Oz – story of a failed Dean search, with committee members occasionally harassed by the Provost.

Zelig – Story of that one faculty member who manages to agree with everyone all the time.

Ratatouille – Story of a Dean who refuses to give any credit to his hard-working and innovative staff.

The Fugitive – Story of the lengths I’ll go to avoid allowing the dean ask me to be on a committee.

The Maltese Falcon – Clearly the black bird refers to the gang’s obsession with rankings.

The Shawshank Redemption — Of course, someone writes his way out of the Shawshank For-Profit Law school .

 

 

Spicer: No cameras!

Acosta: This is an outrage! I’ll take pictures of my socks.

Corn: You could leave, you know.

Spicer: No socks!

Acosta: This is an outrage! I’ll bring in a sketch artist.

Corn: Um, you don’t even have to be there.

Spicer: No sketch artists!

Acosta: This is an outrage! I’ll take a picture of the floor.

Corn: OMG…what purpose does that serve?

Spicer: Press conference will now be in YMCA pool.

Acosta: (putting on swimsuit): This is an outrage. No rubber duckies!

Corn: Please take the life jacket off….you’re in the shallow end.  I mean that both literally and metaphorically.

Spicer: Press conference will be underwater.

Acosta: (Gurgling)!   !!!

At some point, you just have to abandon a toxic relationship.

*Sung to the tune, You Can’t Hurry Love, by the Supremes

I need grades, grades to ease my mind,
I need to find, find an A to call mine,
But Prof said you can’t hurry grades,
No you just have to wait,
She said grading don’t come easy,
It’s a game of Bs and As.
You can’t hurry grades,
No, you just have to wait,
You gotta trust, give it time,
No matter how long I takes;
But how many Cs and Bs must I stand
Before I find a Prof to give me an A again.
Right now the only thing that keeps me hanging on,
When I feel my GPA slide, yeah, it’s almost gone,
I remember Prof said,

You can’t hurry grades,
No you just have to wait,
She said grade curves don’t come easy,
It’s a game of Fs and As.
How long must I wait how much longer will Prof take,
Before anxiety will ’cause my GPA, GPA to break?
No, I can’t bear to check my grades again alone.
I grow impatient for the Prof to post my own,
But when I feel that I, I can’t go on,
These precious words keeps me hanging on,
I remember Prof said,

Can’t hurry grades,
No you just have to wait,
She said grading don’t come easy,
it’s a game of Bs and As.

You can’t hurry grades,
No you just have to wait,
She said avoiding grading comes easy,
When there’s an article deadline to make
No matter how long it takes.

No grades, grades don’t come easy,
But I keep on waiting, anticipating for that
Soft voice to call me late at night,
An employer’s job offer to hold me tight.
I keep waiting; I keep on waiting,
But it ain’t easy, it ain’t easy when Prof said

You can’t hurry grades no,
You just have to wait,
She said trust, give it time
No matter how long I take.

My Twitter friend and famed UCLA biz orgs law professor Stephen Bainbridge responded to my blog post asking the question as to why law professors write law review articles. His blog post is here.  My article was querying not only why we do it, but how we seek to go about measuring the usefulness of what we do. Before I’ve called this the law professor search for meaning.

Professor Bainbridge’s post is thoughtful and interesting. So I greatly appreciate the time he took to write it. Overall, I don’t necessarily disagree with what he wrote, except maybe just a few points.

First, Professor Bainbridge accuses me of “navel gazing,” in my query to answer the questions I posed in my blog post. I would counter by suggesting I was “naval gazing,” because the fleet upon fleet of law journals suggests we are doing a whole lot of publishing. My concerns are about the value of the endeavor, and how we are seeking to validate the activity via a multitude of metrics suggesting “scholarly impact.”

Perhaps Professor Bainbridge and I disagree on whether or not we write to have impact. Professor Bainbridge states that he writes because he loves to do it. “You want to know why I write law review articles? Because it’s fun. I enjoy the process of finding a puzzle, doing the research, and then I really enjoy writing it up. I love the whole process of writing. Thinking about how best to express an idea. Trying to come up with something semi-clever or funny or snarky to work into the text.”

I totes agree. Writing is fun. But, why do we choose to write law reviews? Professor Bainbridge says because we get paid to do so. “Okay, honestly? I write law review articles because I like to write and being a law professor pays better than being a science fiction writer (unless, I suppose, you’re John Scalzi). Also, I can’t write dialogue to save my life. So I found a job that pays me quite well to do something I love doing.”

This also is true. We are expected to write. Not that every tenured faculty member does so, but most do. We then publish our articles in law reviews, with a very clear hierarchy based loosely on U.S. News rankings or other similar indicia.

Professor Bainbridge mentions that we write for ego, and I suspect that’s true.  That’s fine, so long as it doesn’t go overboard. No need to go crazy and give up being humble. Writing is a lonely life, but exchanging ideas and advancing knowledge is social.

I think the thing about Orwell’s essay, which Professor Bainbridge quotes, is that the categories listed as reasons to write overlap. Yes, we do it for ego, but that by itself isn’t sufficient unless we believe that our writing offers some value. It has to give someone a reason to read it. Otherwise, the ego outcome would be the same whether I published my article or burned it in a fire (as I suspect many law review editors do).

That begs the question: Why would anyone read what I wrote? Some of you might be asking yourself this question now.  First, perhaps because the article is beautifully written, such as in a work of fiction or my 50 Shades of Admin law post.  Second, perhaps the reader can learn something from it, such as Bainbridge’s biz orgs books. Third, perhaps the article offers a solution to a perplexing problem. Regardless, my ego is attached to someone reading the piece, and this is where my quibbles about how success as a scholar is measured become more troubling.  How we measure scholarly impact is laden with some problematic assumptions, and I’m not willing to claim that we ought to measure the number of times my friends cited me.  The seeds of knowledge do not produce fruit overnight, so measuring scholarly impact is a short-sighted endeavor.

In any event, Professor Bainbridge made some thoughtful remarks, and I’m still pondering them. I might take his advice and center one panel on the Orwell essay. And invite Frank Partnoy. Maybe even Bainbridge.

Professor Bainbridge’s last suggestion is a deal breaker, however. He suggests, “giving up the whole anonymity thing.” He didn’t say why.  I suspect it’s hard to think about a reason why someone would anonymously blog when he has no bone to pick, isn’t lashing out at the world, and isn’t exactly fearful of administration given he’s tenured.

My thought is this: I get no credit for this. It’s not going to be in my law school’s scholarship notebook, isn’t mentioned in terms of my productivity, and I get paid nothing to write this.  I don’t get to humblebrag about it in my faculty highlights.  Heck, my online persona is more famous than I am.  So, maybe Professor Bainbridge is right: It’s because I just like to write.

 

 

 

 

It’s that time of year when thoughts turn to grades.  Here are some posts I’ve written on the topic.

Why Law Professors Won’t Change Your Grades.

Nine Mistakes You Probably Made on Your Final Exams.

Truths About Final Exam Time.

I Didn’t Ace My Classes! Now what?

Why Does It Take Us [Professors] So Long to Grade Final Exams?

The (De)Grading.

 

 

 

LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO SCHOOL OF LAW

AND LAWPROFBLAWG

PROUDLY PRESENT:

“THE FUTURE OF LEGAL SCHOLARSHIP”

APRIL 6, 2018

SYMPOSIUM TOPICS AND SCHEDULE

8:30 a.m. Registration and Continental Breakfast

9:00 a.m. Welcome and Opening Remarks

9:15 a.m.- 10:30 Panel 1: WHAT IS A GOOD LAW REVIEW ARTICLE?

This panel seeks to determine, absent the usual proxies of placement and author, what constitutes a good academic piece. Must it contribute in some meaningful way to existing legal questions, or is it sufficient that it generate a foundation for research that does so in the future? What are the entry barriers for a good article to be noticed in the marketplace of ideas?

PANELISTS:

Darren Bush, University of Houston Law Center

Caprice Roberts, Savannah Law School

Spencer Waller, Loyola University of Chicago School of Law

10:45- Noon Panel II: DOES SCHOLARSHIP LIVE AND DIE IN A VACUUM?

This panel seeks to determine the purpose of scholarship, apart from the self-serving interests of the author in getting tenure and accolades. Should law professors be advocates, engaging in amicus briefs? Should engagement with the community (op- eds and the press) count as scholarship?

PANELISTS:

Carissa Hessick, University of North Carolina School of Law

Orly Lobel, University of San Diego School of Law

Eric Segall, Georgia State University College of Law

 

Noon – 1:30 p.m. Keynote Lunchtime Speaker: The Hon. Richard Posner, Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit (retired)

1:30 – 2:45 Panel III: SCHOLARSHIP EXCEPTIONALISM: THE DANGERS OF MEASURING SUCCESS

This panel discusses the perils of measurement. While productivity is often measured in the economy, is the ability to measure scholarly success limited? This panel also discusses some of the biases of measurement, and problems with such measurement.

PANELISTS:

Mark Lemley, Stanford Law School

Nancy Leong, University of Denver Sturm College of Law

Anthony Kreis, Chicago-Kent College of Law

 

2:45 – 3:00 CONCLUDING REMARKS

Office Hours Until Last Two Weeks of Class:

Castaway

Office Hours Last Two Weeks of Class:

giphy-tumblr