| | |
|
InLawSchoolsGradesGoUpJustLikeThat 16 - 29 Jun 2010 - Main.JonathanWaisnor
|
| | I'm sure many of you have read the recent NYT Article, In Law Schools, Grades Go Up, Just Like That. I have enjoyed reading the comments of the article, which span from adamant support of tossing out the old regime to total disdain for a generation often described as entitled. I must admit, the article gives me a sinking feeling in my stomach, especially as we approach the Fall recruiting season. I fantasize about the minimal, or complete lack of, anxiety students at schools with no grades must be experiencing as they head into the process. What is most striking to me is that quite a few schools with students who compete with Columbia students for employment have made the determination that eliminating traditional grades altogether, or altering the curve, is in the best interest of their students. Even our friendly neighbor to the south has made alterations to its curve. This begs the question, what are Columbia's justifications for not rolling with the tide?
This topic has obviously received great attention in this course, but I still think this article is an interesting read. I would love to hear any comments or reactions people might have. | | | I am left feeling as though Franke is concluding we should shut up and be happy with the grading system as is, because any change would either inconvenience employers or disadvantage minorities/ women (more than usual).
-- KalliopeKefallinos - 29 Jun 2010 | |
>
> | Franke's post confused me as well. I think the only instructors that could give an employer more than "he went to class and didn't cause any problems" are Professor Moglen and my LPW instructors. Other than my Civil Procedure professor (who had us write a complaint and a motion, which I found very helpful), they're also the only ones who have seen written work with my name attached. For recommendations to play the role that she thinks they would in a gradeless system, the lines at office hours would probably be down the hall and into the elevator, or it would require professors to adopt a method of teaching law school more like this class or LPW. We could also eliminate first-year employment and move hiring to the third-year so students have time to get to know the professor. All of these things seem unlikely. What's more likely is that employers would use law school pedigree, or maybe even undergraduate institution/GPA and LSAT score to prove how smart we are. This is the closest they can get to approximating lawyering potential. First-year grades move them closer to that mark.
The article is valuable for the admission that eliminating grades won't remove the desire employers have to rank us. Even those schools without the A/B/C grading system still have High Pass or Honors, recognizing that there are certain legal jobs which still require employers to find the "best of the best." But for the majority of the students with just "pass," they're assuming a Harvard or Yale degree is proof enough of that student's ability to practice law. Maybe I am just very cynical, but this seems like an admission that first-year doesn't really add anything skill-wise that can't be picked up on the job by an intelligent person rather quickly.
-- JonathanWaisnor - 29 Jun 2010 | | | |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |