| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
|---|
| |
<
< | It is strongly recommended that you include your outline in the body of your essay by using the outline as section titles. The headings below are there to remind you how section and subsection titles are formatted. | >
> | “It’s your exam, you can write it perfectly” | | | | |
<
< | The 4-hour gatekeeper: A law school exam | >
> | -- By TobinKassa - Original 18 Feb 2023, Revised 1 May 2023 | | | | |
<
< | -- By TobinKassa - 18 Feb 2023 | >
> | I always lead with the fact that I am a first-generation Black immigrant and the first in my family to pursue a career in law and public service. I don’t say this to set myself apart, rather it is because these identities will always affect how I perceive and navigate spaces. I am always conscious that few students like me have made their way to law school and even fewer have had the opportunity to attend an ivy league institution. Yet, as Eben pointed out, these circumstances and related institutional barriers have existed for many years before I marched into law school and will continue to persist beyond my graduation. So why use up precious time fighting an institution when I can rethink my position and thrive despite its shortcomings? There is value in this proposition – one that relieves many like me of our burden to be social justice warriors for education reform. But a part of me also can’t help but see this proposition as a cop-out – particularly, considering that my peers and friends continue to fight the administration to ameliorate conditions on behalf of students like me. | | | | |
<
< | I am privileged to be a first-generation Black immigrant and the first in my family to pursue a career in law and public service. Few students like me, who are of underrepresented backgrounds, have made their way to law school. Even fewer have had the opportunity to attend an ivy league institution and champion legal advocacy. Yet, the institutional barriers continue to persist beyond admissions. | >
> | I previously wrote a piece about how law school exams actively work as tools of impediment for underrepresented groups’ access to the legal profession. I observed how law school exams are not sensitive to the lifestyles of underrepresented students and tend to serve as proxies for rewarding native English speakers and fast typers. Eben did not deny the facts but encouraged me to rethink my relationship to law school exams. We talked about how my proficiency in other languages should not be a hindrance. He assured me not to worry about not writing enough on my exams because conciseness is valued in the real world. And I should claim agency over how I respond and participate in exam-taking. As I approach my second-semester finals, I look forward to keep these in mind. | | | | |
<
< | Law school exams, especially those for black law letter classes, actively work as tools of impediment for underrepresented groups’ access to the legal profession. As a general matter, the fact that law school grades are usually based on one exam increases the chance that random factors can impact a student’s performance. Students can be sick on the day of the exam or might be unusually anxious. Others could be facing life crises and emergencies around the time of the exam that can impede their performance. But the arbitrariness of these exams particularly works against the success of underrepresented minorities. Law school exams are more accurately a reflection of a random factors, language barriers, and typing abilities. | >
> | Speaking a different Native language should not be a defect | | | | |
<
< | Randomness enhanced | >
> | English is my third language. I did not learn English in school until I was in the sixth grade. Although I always recognized this language barrier, it was not until I was applying to law schools that I noticed how it could impede my access to the legal profession. My first LSAT score was at the 73rd percentile – a score that most top-ranked schools would not accept. This score, which was based on a 4-hour exam, did not reflect my performance in undergrad nor my capabilities as a prospective law student. I graduated from college with distinction recognition and subsequently worked at a law firm on par with staff attorneys helping litigate high-stakes federal class actions. I am fortunate enough to have been seen beyond arbitrary numbers and accepted into a prestigious institution. Regardless of the institutional barriers, I carved a space for myself. And I want my experience to serve as an example for others similarly situated to not let the language barrier control or frustrate the process. Our native languages are our superpowers – they give us a distinct insight that many of our counterparts lack. | | | | |
<
< | Communities of color, individuals of low-income households, and first-generation students are likely to experience random factors at a higher rate. Often times, these students face a host of issues that their privileged peers can ignore or can compartmentalize. A low-income student may not have the luxury of a quiet office space because they live with their family or multiple roommates who may not appreciate the gravity of law school exams. Likewise, a first-generation student may not be adequately prepared because they did not have access to resources such as tutors or outlines, that would have equipped them as well as their privileged peers. Communities of colors are additionally known to be collectivistic – familial obligations always take precedence. If there is an issue with the family, particularly related to finances, there is a high probability that it is the law student who will be called to solve the problem. If these issues are arising around exam time, this added stress or weight of responsibility, is only going to adversely impact the student’s performance on the exam. | >
> | Shifting Authority | | | | |
<
< | Language barrier
Research suggests that language literacy has a significant influence on students’ success in course assessments. The way students interpret and respond to elements of an exam or fact patterns are mediated by linguistic and cultural factors, such as home language and prior educational experiences in their home country. This gap in understanding forces non-native English speakers to separate themselves from familiar ways of thinking, shift their mental framework, and reorient themselves – all during the time of the exam, taking away precious time from actually responding to the questions. Writing a coherent sentence does not always come as effortlessly as it does for native English speakers. It requires a lot of brain power; it involves recalling words or common phrases, rewording sentences, wordsmithing, and restructuring long-winded arguments. As a non-native English speaker, I can attest it generally feels like battling yourself trying to articulate things you know you fully understand but simply cannot naturally translate into words on a paper, especially not under a 4-hour time constraint. | >
> | Over the course of this semester, Eben has drilled into us that we, students, hold all the leverage at the law school. If we came together and organized, we can make the administration do whatever we demand it to do. I have seen and experienced this. Following several “urgent” emails from OCS about not fulfilling requirements for job fairs, meetings with SJI to commit to a “pure” public interest career, and discussions with administrators who were concerned about my career choices, I can say it is all largely puff. The false sense of urgency the law school imposes on us is merely to control us. Despite many unfulfilled requirements and missed deadlines, I still got the job I wanted this summer. Despite a summer job in big law, I continue to have meaningful relationships with public interest organizations and faculty members who have a public service job for me if I choose to pivot. To this extent, I take Eben’s point that we really do pull the strings. | | | | |
<
< | English is my third language. I did not learn English in school until I was in the sixth grade. Although I always recognized this language barrier, it was not until I was applying to law schools that I noticed how it could impede my access to the legal profession. My first LSAT score was at the 73rd percentile – a score that most top ranked schools would not accept. This score, which was based on a 4-hour exam, did not reflect my performance in undergrad or my capabilities as a prospective law student. I graduated from college with distinction recognition and subsequently worked at a law firm on par with staff attorneys helping litigate high-stakes federal class actions. I am fortunate enough to have been seen beyond arbitrary numbers and accepted into a prestigious institution. However, the same way my LSAT score initially prohibited me from attending quality institutions, law school exams can serve as barriers to non-native English speakers from accessing law firms and organizations that require high exam performances. | >
> | In the context of an exam, this shift in authority does not come as easily. The non-negotiable thing about my journey in law school is that to graduate, I need to be in JG over the next several days to take my Property, Criminal Law, and Torts exams. There is no puff about it. There is no circumventing the administration’s authority unless of course, I am willing to get a discretionary grade. This is where I struggle with my inner social justice warrior. Students for many generations have demanded the institution to reform its exam and grading policies to no avail. We have organized, we have demanded, yet the issues continue to persist. Eben suggested, instead of resisting the overall exam structure, I should focus on my 1:1 relationship with each exam. He told me each exam is flexible and can be adjusted to fit my needs. Regardless of the questions’ density or complexity, he told me I should simply respond to the questions I want to answer. “It’s your exam, you can write it perfectly.” | | | | |
<
< | Typing test | >
> | Claiming your agency | | | | |
<
< | At its core, the 4-hour law exam is a typing test. Students are asked to spend 18 weeks silently absorbing materials and, at the end of it, asked to regurgitate all they have learned in a 4-hour setting. And because only a limited number of students can get high ranks, they are told the more you can argue in the alternative, the more points you can collect. Accuracy is important, but generally your chances are higher if you throw as much at the wall to see what sticks.
This puts underrepresented students at a huge disadvantage. First, as aforementioned, if there is a language barrier, the non-native English speaker’s time on the exam is even more limited. Second, white students more likely to have access to typing lessons. Predominately white primary and secondary institutions have typing lessons as part of their curriculums. This is not the case for most historically minority schools and international institutions. Many students who attend the latter institutions moreover come from low socio-economic backgrounds and therefore are not able to afford private typing classes. Without access to typing lessons at a young age, racial minority students are already at a disadvantage compared to their white peers who can type at 70-80 words per minute. This is critically exacerbated by time-constraints. Students of racial minority backgrounds often note that they either did not finish the exam or were nowhere near the word limit. By of an example, the model answer for my Constitutional Law exam was 7-pages long. If a student cannot type at 70-80 words per minute, all factors held constant, they would not even be in the same category as the model answer. Allow for random factors and language barriers to be considered, the student would be lucky to get an average grade.
Your points may be correct, as logic certainly suggests. Decades of experience lead me to somewhat different conclusions, which have if nothing else the observation of several thousand students to go on. We can discuss if you would find it useful what I've learned over the years. I would expect that conversation to determine how to revise this draft.
| >
> | To fully shift authority, we have to recognize our power and claim it. As inadequate as the exam might be, we can and must bring our full selves to it. I was working on a statutory interpretation problem a few days ago. On the first take, I jumped straight to my outline and applied the relevant doctrine from A to Z. But on a second try, I decided to zoom out; I couldn’t help but notice how the statute served to disproportionately affect Black and Brown communities. Instead of blindly applying the relevant doctrine, I wrote about its racial impact. This second answer felt so much more fulfilling. I’m not sure if it was the right answer but, to me, it was perfect because it mattered. | | |
You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable. |
|