Thursday, September 13, 2007
Posts
If you want a background, please read the comments on the previous post. It seems the admins are being called upon to bring some frequent fresh substance to the blog. So, what would you all like to see more of? Campus news, local interesting or legal (or legal and interesting) news, interesting nonlocal legal news, advice? I'm all ears. actually eyes.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
See, here is the problem. The "admins" last year could be counted on to contribute one or more quality posts every 10 days or so. It kept the blog moving and sparked discussion. Now we have the admins asking for help as to topics. This is what needs to change.
Here is a topic though. Anonymous for obvious reasons, but after talking to an OCI coordinator at a major firm, here was a surprise. Apparently the CU Law Career Services Office was not aware of issues firms are having with the relatively depressed grades at CU. Since CU doesn't inflate grades the way other schools do, we are put at a competitive disadvantage (someone from CU with a 2.9 GPA will not be considered, but a similar candidate with a 3.2 due to inflation from another school has a chance at being hired). The OCI coordinator mentioned above mentioned this concern to the Career Services Office, and there was surprise. Discuss that!
I have a topic. I don't know if the guys involved want this on the blog, but I just heard, today, that two of our law student were beaten-up on the hill. Further, I understand that the Boulder Police are doing very little about it. Discuss that.
Bobby totally said hi to me in the halls today. He's such a dreamboat. Discuss that.
Thats funny that you would mention grade "deflation" at CU. I guess our "84" median translates right about to a 3.0 median. I have friends at other schools with 2.7 medians. I guess I always thought CUs grades were slightly inflated.
Oh admins ... please think of good things for us to talk about. Our brains are so full of our own self worth and need for top grades and for people at OCI to love us that we can't think of anything to talk about.
But be warned, if you pick something stupid we will skewer you mercilessly with our anonymous comments!
Now that I'm past OCI and looking for a job after graduation... grade inflation by one particular school in the area is a problem, especially when students from "that" school are applying for the same jobs as me. I'm so glad that firms and others are starting to realize this -- but those that are understand are still in the minority.
I spoke with an appellate judge about this issue this summer and he understood the discrepency in grades between CU and DU students. For example, a CU grad at a 2.9 GPA and a DU student at a 3.3 GPA may be more equal than CU/DU students with the same GPA. (And, I'd still bet that the CU student with a lower GPA would be a better clerk for that judge.)
I'd like to see a thread where we discuss funny comments made in class. For example, "Transsexuals ruin much of the traditional law." RBC in Wills and Trusts.
Here's the problem (with posts) as I see it. It's the idea that blog content is up to the admins.
We don't need admins to do this. We need participants to do it instead. What is needed is for more participants to get-a-name and let Rice Eater or Memphis Minnie know they'd like to be able to enter initial posts.
thank you coffinberry. We are presumably (I'll have to check w/ RE to verify) happy to allow people to post. All you need to do is get a name, comment for awhile under that name, and then ask us for guest status and you can then post. As you can imagine I'm a bit hesitant to give posting permissions willy-nilly (RBC catch phrase), so I think getting a name first will be a good way to go about it and establish some credibility.
And as for the funny professor comments, I love that idea. I have a list of many of the great things AW said last year. (Sweden's legal system is like IKEA: elegant in its simplicity). Also, the blog overheardinlawschool has lots of great comments made by profs & students.
Why don't we discuss whether or not to allow anonymous comments? I don't think that has ever been discussed ad nausem?
Too much turnover in career services in general. Poor V. is leaving us, presumably because she was overworked. The job required her to travel often and spend too much time away from her little ones. Something tells me K. will soon do the same thing.
I think V has done an excellent job, and I think it is A-OK if she decides that her priorities are with her family, but there's this little thing called "foreseeability." When she took the job she would have to have known that she'd be required to do a lot of traveling. I'm sure EB will get the Asst. Dean position if V really is leaving and he wants it, and I'm fine with that. And just because K appears to be preggers doesn't necessarily mean that she's going to jump ship.
Ok, seriously. This initials thing is out of control. Either allow us to type names or just don't mention them at all.
"Transsexuals ruin much of the traditional law." RBC in Wills and Trusts.
Good to see he's figured this out. I seem to remember him being quite shocked, shocked(!) at the concept during a discussion of gender discrimination (VMI case I think) during Con Law Spring 06.
Anyone else remember that class? His eyes seemed to get bigger and bigger as one student discribed how a fellow student in an all-womens college graduated as a man, etc.
Though I do hope that RBC properly assigns the blame to science rather than transsexuals, since technology now can determine that an outwardly appearing man may in fact chromosonally be a woman, regardless of whether that person chooses to go the sex-change route. So statistically, VMI probablly admitted at least one 'woman' during its storied all-male history, which I think somewhat undermines some of of the Justices' arguments over the matter. (forgive me if I forget the details) Also has relevance to the those man-woman-only marriage laws floating around out there.
Post a Comment