OT: Boneyard Lawyers

[BigErnMcCracken]

I loved it. Had an absolute blast all three years. So much more pleasant than having an actual job.

I think that working for a couple years first made a huge difference. After grinding out a 9-5 (or 9-10 as was more often the case) for a couple years the idea of throwing on sweatpants and being a student again was a pretty indescribable feeling. I noticed that the younger people in my section tended to carry over that "all-nighter at the library, frantic about finals" mentality but I don't think I felt a moment of school-related stress in three years.

Going to a law school where the grades are all pretty much the same and your job prospects are pretty good no matter how you do helped, too. Law school was infinitely more fun than practicing law.

 

[NJHusky]

my favorite professor did an “on-call” Socratic system where you were Only going to be cold called upon a few select times over the course of the semester (like 2-3) but he would drill down on each student. I thought it was more than fair and would still work in virtual environments imo.

That's fair...did you know which was your day on the hot seat? Or was or was it a general...you're up soon. I had a professor with the opposite approach which I liked...he just did the usual random calling on people, but you had 3 "passes" with no explanation need or negative impact on your class participation

 

[NJHusky]

Law school was infinitely more fun than practicing law.

That's probably the most accurate statement in this thread IMO. I would have liked your school if the grades were pretty much all the same...You obviously went to a TOP TOP tier school if your job prospects weren't impacted by class rank and law review. Had a client who once said to me, he didn't do that great in law school but still got a great starting job...only after a little probing did he fess up to going to Harvard..

 

[the Q]

That's fair...did you know which was your day on the hot seat? Or was or was it a general...you're up soon. I had a professor with the opposite approach which I liked...he just did the usual random calling on people, but you had 3 "passes" with no explanation need or negative impact on your class participation

you knew the exact dates. Just not when during class on that day

 

[HuskyHawk]

That's probably the most accurate statement in this thread IMO. I would have liked your school if the grades were pretty much all the same...You obviously went to a TOP TOP tier school if your job prospects weren't impacted by class rank and law review. Had a client who once said to me, he didn't do that great in law school but still got a great starting job...only after a little probing did he fess up to going to Harvard..

There are only a handful of law schools where that is really the case. No idea where @BigErnMcCracken went but it’s probably safe to assume he wasn‘t at the bottom of the class.

 

[husky8273]

Oh man, that feeling of not having any idea what the duck___ your Fed Courts professor is talking about as you desperately try to make yourself invisible as he/she looks for someone to call on. Nothing like it.

...a petrified 1L classmate froze one day when called on and didn't respond, the prof did his best "Bueller, Bueller" act until exclaiming "it's like playing tennis.....with no one on the other side of the net".

 

[husky8273]

you knew the exact dates. Just not when during class on that day

not nearly as nerve racking as true random calling

 

[husky8273]

That's fair...did you know which was your day on the hot seat? Or was or was it a general...you're up soon. I had a professor with the opposite approach which I liked...he just did the usual random calling on people, but you had 3 "passes" with no explanation need or negative impact on your class participation

also had a professor with a "pass with no impact" policy. I was the first in the class to use it. Next class I was the only one called on but was fully prepared. There were few passes by anyone the rest of the semester.

 

[temery]

My guess is this is an issue with any state credentials. When I graduated I had lifetime certification to teach any subject, and the school district paid for all PD.

Ten years later, no more blanket certification, and we had to renew every five years ($100). Initially the district paid for PD, then they pretty much stopped. I had to take a couple 3 credit classes a year, with the district Paying 2/3 for an "A." In the end, I was paying $1k to $2k a year for the classes I wanted. There were often state funded classes, but most were terrible.

In my last year I was "selected" to take a federally mandate full year class on ESL. Because of this, health problems, and burnout, I put in for retirement a week later. One thing that still cracks me up is our ESL teacher only spoke English. She was great, but I would have thought being at least bilingual would have been a requirement.

Note to any mass teachers - I've only known one person whose PDPs were checked when applying for recertification. I know many who just pay the $100, click yes when asked if they met the requirements, and get their card in the mail a couple weeks later.

 

[the Q]

not nearly as nerve racking as true random calling

No. But it’s fair and allows for a better experience

 

[BlueDogs]

That's probably the most accurate statement in this thread IMO. I would have liked your school if the grades were pretty much all the same...You obviously went to a TOP TOP tier school if your job prospects weren't impacted by class rank and law review. Had a client who once said to me, he didn't do that great in law school but still got a great starting job...only after a little probing did he fess up to going to Harvard..

Schooling in general is infinitely more fun than real life. If you only knew what you know now, it would be even better. As I tell my neurotic kids, grades matter until your first job, then nobody cares. It’s how you perform in your job. So, lighten up.

 

[BlueDogs]

...a petrified 1L classmate froze one day when called on and didn't respond, the prof did his best "Bueller, Bueller" act until exclaiming "it's like playing tennis.....with no one on the other side of the net".

Ha-I still remember the first question of the first class on the first day. It was contracts and the question in a big southern drawl was “Who is Baxendale?” Dead silence. After a very uncomfortable period, he starts calling randomly on terrified people. The answers given where all “correct” but wrong. He asked some other vague related questions, until the answer finally was revealed. He wanted to know what the defendant’s business was about. It was a great lesson in lawyering: rule 1: understand the motivations, business and financial relationships of the parties.

 

[BParkDog]

I loved law school. Absolutely loved it (except moot court f----ing up by 1st Christmass break). I was in my late 20s, married, kids, job . . . . Virtually every other student was a 22 year old know-it-all. In the aggregate, they had a ridiculously narrow perspective on life, which coincided with all but a few of the professors - relatively small law school. I was viewed as some sort of ancient outlier.

I was very naive. I read and learned all of what they gave me 1L and . . . struggled on tests. By 2L I figured out that most of what was said in class was a waste of time, and I had to go buy supplements and find other resources to figure out what they wanted on the exam.

Never did understand everybody being scared in class. If I read the cases, no problem answering the question. If I didn't I tell the prof - I didn't read the case. Classroom participation wasn't usually a part of the grade anyway. Maybe it's because I was older and had been in school way too long.

Grades were decidedly not all the same. Professors were forced to give half of the students a B grade or worse. Therefore, the competition for the As was fairly intense.

But I learned more in that 3 years than, I think, at any other point in life. Not just about law, but about a lot of collateral, related concepts about which I had previously known nothing.

It was bad for my marriage, tbh. We made it through.

"Socratic" method is fun and all, but, ultimately, it's incredibly hard to "teach" somebody how to be a lawyer. That is, if you take, as a given, that issue spotting is a very important part of being a lawyer, then you have to believe that you can teach somebody the cognitive process required to spot issues. I taught LSAT test prep for multiple years. Hundreds of students. Also taught SATs, MCATs, and so on. It was fairly simple to get most students solid gains on the SATs and GREs and such. For LSATs? Nope. For 85% of students there was, maybe, a 5-10% gain in score, max.

Why? Because some things can't be taught, or at least not well.

Issue spotting, to me, is one of them.

Had a friend bomb the first test we had as 1Ls - contracts. He missed the issue that the person buying the service was . . . a minor. When he complained to me, I told him he missed the most obvious issue - it resulted in a voided contract for a non-essential service. He disagreed. He ended up complaining to the Prof, getting nowhere, and then giving her a bad review. Took him 5 times to pass the CT bar, which is a very easy bar exam to pass.

He was an English undergrad and was used to getting all As.

I think great lawyers are born, for the most part, and not made. You can hone skills, you can work on your presentation, and so on. But, your brain limits.

Ultimately, the most important things I learned in law school were not taught to me.

EDIT - also, agree with the poster, above, who said learning styles differ - with the exception of a few live-play classes (moot court and such), I didn't need to be in a physical classroom to learn what I needed to be a lawyer. As I noted, I had to teach myself what I needed to pass the exam anyway, and you figure out how to "think" like a lawyer as you review more and more cases.

 

[8893]

"You teach yourselves the law, but I train your minds. You come in here with a skull full of mush; you leave thinking like a lawyer."

 

[husky8273]

"You teach yourselves the law, but I train your minds. You come in here with a skull full of mush; you leave thinking like a lawyer."

The Paper Chase: What Does the Film Tell Us About Contemporary Legal Education? – Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog

.