In my attempt to avoid outlining, I’ve been spending a lot of time thinking about this whole process that we’re all involved in right now. We have spent the last four months reading cases, going to classes that go over those cases, and then promptly forgetting everything about those cases. Until now. Now we hurriedly cram our minds with 4 months worth of information from four different subjects. That’s a lot of cramming.
I’m sure many people have spent many hours lamenting this style of learning, but I wanted to share my feelings on it, while I’m in the middle of going through it. The first word that comes to my mind is ineffective. I don’t remember much from first semester (which I may be sorry about come Contracts and Civ Pro exams) and I think this is mostly the result of trying to let go of everything I learned for Torts so that I could fit in everything I needed to know for Contracts in two days. I find it frustrating to feel like I spend so much time reading cases and taking notes on them during the semester, only to have months to forget the information and then have to relearn it all in the last 3-4 weeks of the semester and then forget it again.
Am I alone here? Is there some 2L or 3L (or even 1L) who wants to share some tricks for making this $20,000 a semester learning experience more meaningful?
Of course, the most frustrating thing to me is that these one-time three hour exams become my grade for an ENTIRE semester’s worth of work. The grading process seems pretty arbitrary, especially when I’m pretty sure that some professors actually do grade like this. In general, I think exams that are created so that no one can get everything correct are somewhat silly and pointless. I find it irritating to walk into an exam knowing that doing well means that the exam didn’t totally kick my a**–it just kicked it a little. I am aware that I have chosen to be in this system and knew what it entailed before I started. I certainly was not prepared for how much I would miss normal tests and quizzes that helped me in accumulating knowledge throughout the semester instead of waiting for the last month to cram it all in.
How does everyone else feel?
Stop whining. You knew this was how law school was graded before your signed up. Maybe you should study more during the semester so you don’t have to cram at the end.
Good grief. I’m so tired of the “stop whining” BS that people post here anonymously.
1L, do you think it’s totally dumb to have a discussion about whether this is the best way to grade law school classes? You think we should just be quiet and suck it up and do as we’re told? Children should be seen and not heard? Navah’s comments are valid: there’s no guarantee that the law school grading system rewards the right things (who even knows what the right things are, after all?). Her post invited feedback, not insults. Before you pointed it out, she had already said that she knew this was what she was signing up for – we all did. That in no way means that we shouldn’t talk about things to try to figure out how to make them better.
We all post here using our full names, and we take a lot of time out of our very busy lives to try to make this blog a place where people can talk about things. I leave the comments open and never delete anything because I want this to be an open forum, and generally the positive outweighs the negative. I have never felt that GW was a particularly bitter place, but based on the comments we’ve been getting I may change my mind. What’s next – ripping pages out of the library books? It’s so cliche, and so, so disappointing.
It’s easy to post a lame, mean-spirited comment when you don’t have to attach your name to it. You can hide when you see us walking around campus – if you even know who we are. You don’t have to own up to your crappy attitude. What’s the point in saying things like that? Just trying to be hurtful? Just not a nice person? There’s no point in being rude here. If that’s your only contribution to the discussion here, do everyone a favor and stay out of it.
Amen to both Sai. The anonymous attacks on our writers is really sad, and it’s not at all why we started this blog. There are other forums for that, but please, if you’re not here to foster the community and dialogue Sua Sponte is aiming for, then keep it to yourself.
Addressing Navah’s post, I agree that this might not be the most effective way of doing things. The thing that struck me as being particularly strange about this system of learning, is that there’s no way to measure your own progress. I can read a case and think I understand it, and not realize till the end of the semester that I didn’t totally grasp the concepts the way I was supposed to. It’s very frustrating, and without checkmarks throughout the semester there’s no real way to know that you’re in trouble until too late.
that was supposed to say “both Sai and Navah.”
Hey if it worked for Oliver Wendell Holmes, it should work for us, right?
So, is the reason that you post on this blog because you want to get feedback about your ideas or because you want to hear “amens” from your friends to validate your angst?
Here is my feedback: saying you pay $20,000 a semester and all you get are meaningless finals is whining. If you want law school to be meaningful, make it meaningful. If you didn’t like it after the first few weeks, you could have left and gotten some of your tuition back.
I don’t think you should post your whining in a public forum and then invite potential students to read your post and judge their decision on whether to attend based on your pre-finals anxiety.
I hope that you can handle this feedback even though it is contrary to your stated opinion.
It’s not really feedback so much as you misconstruing Navah’s perfectly valid criticism of the law school system as whining. We want to be here and we want to get as much out of our time here as we can. There is nothing wrong-incontrast I would say there is everything right- in our questioning a system of learning that may have gotten off track somewhere. Didn’t we all decide to become lawyers because we wanted to question things and have a positive impact on the world? Well why not start within the walls of our own law school? Perhaps you didn’t expect people to come back at your inciteful post, but please, don’t insult us further by trying to defend your anger-mongering as a substantive post.
I wrote this particular entry with two goals in mind. First, I wanted to create a space where people who have good studying and learning techniques can share them. I am not claiming that I am doing this whole law school thing right. In fact, my post made it pretty obvious that I’m sure there’s a better way out there that I haven’t discovered. If someone has discovered it, I’d love for them to share that with their peers. Remember, that’s what we are, peers. Second, I wrote this post to express doubts I have as to whether this form of education is the best way to educate lawyers.
This topic is very relevant to our current experiences. The fact that someone has already disagreed with my opinion is proof positive that there is disagreement about the value of this education system and what the best way to approach it is. This blog should be a repository for thoughtful and substantive discussions on topics just like these. I encourage everyone to make those comments in a respectful way, no matter how much you disagree with me or my colleagues.
1L-
“I don’t think you should post your whining in a public forum and then invite potential students to read your post and judge their decision on whether to attend based on your pre-finals anxiety.”
My only response to this is that if a Pre-L is reading this post and my feelings on finals makes them rethink their decision to go to law school then I think I’ve done a good job (though I hope they do more research to get a broad range of opinions). If they think this sort of education isn’t for them, then maybe they should think hard about how much they want to be a lawyer before spending a lot of money to find that out. More than my anxiety, I think rudeness would turn students off from this school. Your comments are not the general experience that I have here and it surprises me when I hear this tone on this blog. Part of the reason I chose GW is because it is not a cut throat place. Every upperclassman I’ve met has been really helpful and eager to share tips on how to make law school easier for yourself and most 1Ls are more than happy to help and support each other, even during stressful exam periods. GW’s collegial atmosphere is one of its greatest assets, and it is that connectedness that I hope to tap into when I write for this blog.
In substance, I agree with 1L (I just think there are more constructive ways of conveying the message). It’s my opinion that in law school, in contrast to undergrad, there aren’t tests and quizzes (a “way to measure your progress”) because in most jobs you aren’t afforded such guidance either. When I worked on projects at my job before school, I never turned in rough drafts for my boss to edit. I turned in the completed project and it was either accepted or rejected, though minor changes could be made here and there. Also, you’re considered more of an autonomous adult in law school and how you study is a choice that is given to you, unlike in undergrad where you were essentially forced to constantly study the material due to test and quizzes. Here, some people decide to not do any work until close to finals and try and cram; some read a case, get the rule, write it in their notes and move on to the next case; others read the cases, get the rule and put it in the broad context of the subject, essentially outlining as the semester progresses. To each their own. I personally would think that outlining as the semester progresses would help maintain a grasp of the subject matter and limit any cramming at the end, but I don’t exactly practice what I preach so I can’t be sure.
As for whether the system itself needs restructuring: I say no. Tests and quizzes may be beneficial to some for that constant reassurance of their progress, but there are two drawbacks. One, not every student needs that type of structure and as I don’t think it exactly correlates to the professional world I think maybe we’re better off the way it is. Second, and more importantly, the more tests and quizzes we have the more time professors have to spend creating and grading them as opposed to researching/writing. We go to a well regarded school because the professors here are considered experts in their respective fields of study, more tests and quizzes would only be detrimental to that aspect in my opinion.
In sum, try a different studying technique. It may limit your free time early on in the semester, but you’ll have more later on as you won’t be cramming as much at the end. Delayed gratification.
1L: “I hope that you can handle this feedback even though it is contrary to your stated opinion.”
Feedback: “the return of information about the result of a process or activity; an evaluative response.”
Interesting. It seems like the definition of feedback is exactly what Navah was asking for in her post, and certainly not what was given by 1L.
Here’s my feedback:
I will not profess to have been a model student this semester or last semester. I did the reading and briefed the cases for the most part. I took notes in class, but I didn’t start outlining until about 3 weeks ago. My plan was certainly to start that sooner, but that fell by the wayside. Just want to put out there that I am evaluating this process from the standpoint of someone who has been less than perfect, which I imagine is the standpoint of most of us 1Ls.
That being said, I think we’re all retaining more than we may think. I’ve definitely heard other 1Ls discussing cases and theories and information from first semester. I think that comes more from class time than from preparing for exams, but I do think that the exam preparation sometimes brings it all together for us. I think that evaluations part way through the semester would be really helpful. I know that the midterm last semester in civ pro really made a difference for me. It gave me an opportunity to see where I stood in terms of my understanding at that point in time. However, I realize that creating and grading exams takes a long time and that asking a professor to grade 120 (for my section) exams in the middle of the semester might be a little much. Although maybe it wouldn’t. I don’t really know what a professor’s workload is like.
In terms of the exams themselves, I agree that creating an exam where no one can get everything correct seems a little absurd. I don’t think that all professors do that, though. I think that there are some professors who seem like they’re out to get you when they write their exams, like they want everyone to walk out feeling they’ve just been run over by a truck. However, my experience with some of my professors – Maggs, for instance – has been entirely different. I think Maggs really wants us all to do well. He lays out a clear outline everyday for the class and provides additional materials for us on a website. He’s very clear about what the exam will be like and what he’s looking for and tells us what he thinks is the best way to study for it. He’s never trying to hide the ball. He wants all of us to leave our 1L year with a really strong basis in contracts law. And I think that’s what a good professor really wants. That doesn’t mean that I enjoy taking the exam or that I love outlining, but I feel like doing well is based on how much work I put into it.
I think one of the hardest things about this process, and what Navah has spoken to in her post, is that sometimes it feels like the amount of work you put into the class isn’t reflected in your grade at the end. You might have worked the hardest in one class and felt the best about it and you get your lowest grade in that class. When that kind of thing happens, sometimes it makes it difficult to get the motivation going. Maybe that’s useful in preparing us for the real world. The hardest worker doesn’t always win the case, I guess.
I’ll end with the system of grading on a curve. I have to be honest that I see no use in it. If the point of law school is to teach us the law, then why can’t more than a certain percentage of people have adequately learned it? What would be wrong with a grading system where each exam is graded against the model and not against the other exams, where if 30 people had excellent exams, 30 people could get As? I think one argument here may be that large groups of people just fall into a curve like that, but I don’t really believe it. I think that knowing that you’re going to be graded on a curve is demoralizing and breeds a competitiveness that isn’t necessary or useful for learning.
Mr. MG: “One, not every student needs that type of structure and as I don’t think it exactly correlates to the professional world I think maybe we’re better off the way it is.”
I disagree. It seems that, when discussing law school reform, many people use “well, that’s the way the real world works” as some sort of moral justification for the all-in mentality of law school exams and even the curriculum itself. Some professors and student leaders will throw assignments or deadlines at people at the last minute, and justify their own disorganization (or disrespect for others) by saying “Well, in the REAL WORLD, you could have a partner calling you at 10pm to write a memo…” or “Well in the REAL WORLD, you’re going to be chained to the basement of the law firm until 12:30 at night anyways…”
But this isn’t the real world – this is law school. And this time is supposed to prepare us FOR the real world, not BE the real world. For example, in the real world, memorandums aren’t written with closed exam software in freezing classrooms in exactly 3 hours with only an outline, a textbook, and a couple supplements as your only prayer and hope. Life isn’t graded on a curve. Sure, there are high expectations, especially from employers – where I worked before law school, we had to account for our time by the minute. Literally. But in the real world, everyone at least has the chance to succeed, rather than being boxed into a curve, because there are so many choices of what to do with your life and there’s more feedback. And reform in the law school curriculum does not have to be an entire overhaul or a return to college-like tests and quizzes every week. A little more feedback would be nice – like ebwestbrook said, it’s discouraging to go through a whole semester thinking you got the law right when really you were dead wrong. How does this make good lawyers?
But I think it is a meaningful experience in this type of education, for the reasons stated by Katie and, to a certain extent, Mr. MG. Law school attracts a certain type of person with high personal expectations, which is why people rise to the occasion when they’re thrown into the deep end of the pool. And there are very high expectations from professors and the law school itself – the lack of hand-holding means that we’re adults and we’re expected to take responsibility for our education. We find meaning when we find our niche in law school – and there are many niches at GW – when the lightbulb goes off in class or when we realize “I could TOTALLY do this type of law for life (or at least a summer…)” We learn from those professors who enjoy their time with students, take pride in their classrooms, and love sharing their interests. We see the substance of our knowledge in heated debates in the hard lounge about our latest assignment or what’s in the New York Times today. We see the benefit of our education when we think twice upon hearing the usual rhetoric or the latest political fad in the news. And most of all, we take meaning from the changes that have occurred in just 9 months in the way that we think, speak, and make our mark on the world at large.
The bar exam is even worse in terms of potentially open-ended testing of a vast body of law for which you prepare in a short period of time. Practice is a bit like that too for a while. All in all, the law school training ground has a lot in common with what really happens. Still, I “whine” about it all all the time.