The bluebook is great, and Terrell is not
I was looking through the bluebook today while checking a fellow law clerk’s citations (I check everyone’s cites and give them grades on their papers; the one today was the highest yet at A-) when I came across the funniest thing in the bluebook. They use a lot of example cases to illustrate rules, all of which I assumed were real. Today, however, I found the rule dealing with omission of “the” in a case name; as you all know, you retain “the” if it is a part of the party’s proper name. To show the point, they used Czervik v. The Flying Wasp.
For those of you who are unenlightened, Czervik was Rodney Dangerfield’s character in the 1980 epic Caddyshack, while The Flying Wasp was Judge Smails’ boat. As we all know, Czervik destroyed Smails’ boat, so I guess the outcome of Czervik v. The Flying Wasp is obvious. It wouldn’t surprise me if this example has been in the bluebook since 1982 and no one on the editorial board even knows its in there; after all, how may Caddyshack quoters could there be on the Columbia Law Review today?
Now for the Terrell rumor of the day. Just a note, these are entirely speculative and this post should not be considered any more than conjecture and opinion. It does not imply the existence of facts, and any such implications are explicitly disclaimed. According to a source near to a source close to South Texas professor (no, its not Stevenson), Terrell isn’t coming back at all. His summer classes were cancelled and he isn’t on the fall schedule; the word on the street is that he’s gone forever. This same source also says that the likely outcome of all of this is going to be a choice between one’s grade and pass/fail.
The next bit-o-Terrell gossip comes from one of Rensberger’s current Property II students for the summer session. Last night, a student in his class asked him what was going on with Terrell, to which the Dean responded “we’re working on it.”
Later, I intercepted (read: was handed a copy of) an email from the ring leader of the § C “give me pass/fail or give me death” movement. He apparently met with Rensberger either today or yesterday. Ole Renny said that Terrell is the only professor who has yet to turn in his grades (apparently there is a delay between turning the grades in and their being processed, but the registrar’s website looks like a good half dozen profs are late). The school has purportedly tried to call Terrell several times, but to no avail. Apparently, the school has had no contact with and has no idea where Terrell is (I guess the administration doesn’t hang out in strip clubs, otherwise they would have found him by now). This fits with the “we’re working on it” statement, as it seems the Terrell situation is in limbo. As a result, I’m optimistic that the school hasn’t emailed me back on the Terrell issue, as it seems that they are genuinely unsure of their response. A pass/fail option would make me happier than George Bailey on Christmas.
posted by Sam @ 6:42 PM
6 comments
6 Comments:
I wan on the internet this evening trying to find Buford's phone number at home or at his ranch house. I am in section C. This is a copy of a letter that I sent Dean Rensberger several weeks ago. If anyone who checks this site sees my letter and wants to tell Dean Rensberger that they agree with what I have written and wish to file a grade protest, feel free to do so. Dean Rensberger has told me that if you want to file a grade protest you should do it BEFORE the grades are handed in (whenever that is).
Associate Dean Rensberger,
This letter serves as a follow up to our meeting and telephone conversation regarding Prof. Terrell’s Property I, Section C final examination. Per those discussions, I formally request a grade protest.
Recap of Circumstances
On May 17 I learned from several classmates that a series of questions on the examination were previously made available to the subset of students who attended the Langdell classes offered for Prof. Terrell’s section. Estimates varied as to the number of questions involved. In addition, it was unclear how the Langdell scholar obtained the questions or if Prof. Terrell knew that the questions were provided to the Langdell students.
You have conducted an investigation of the matter and have learned that 10 questions appeared on the test that had been provided to the Langdell students. The Langdell scholar had saved sample questions provided by Prof. Terrell to her section when she took the class sometime during the last two years and chose to use these as instructional aids.
Suggested Remedies
I strongly believe that corrective action must take place to remedy this situation. Langdell is supposed to provide insight and assistance – not answers. In essence a fraction of the class was provided the answers to close to 1/5 of the examination.
It is true that Langdell is offered to all students. However, not all students can attend when the classes are offered. For instance, I have child care responsibilities on the weekends and simply could not attend the class. A failure to address the situation would act as a de facto penalty for my inability to attend an optional class due my parental responsibilities. My classmates who also did not attend the class for their particular circumstances (e.g., a long commute, family responsibilities, work, etc.) would be similarly penalized.
When we met in your office three possible remedies were discussed: (1) make the class a pass/fail option, (2) toss the disputed questions from the examination, (3) do nothing. Because so many questions are involved I do not believe that #3 is viable. Even if the release of the questions was accidental (which I believe it was), those students who did not attend optional Langdell classes would be penalized. An examination of the remaining possibilities leads to the conclusion that #1 is the best option.
Tossing the disputed questions from the examination would not act as an adequate remedy due to the extra time on the examination that the Langdell students were effectively provided by virtue of having the questions in advance.
Prof. Terell’s final was open book and open note. As a result I and many other students brought into the examination a copy of the practice test and answers that Prof. Terrell provided the entire class during the semester. The final examination contained three verbatim questions and answer options from this practice test. If I am regarded as an average student (a fair characterization of my first semester grades) it took me approximately 15 seconds for each one of these three questions to recognize that the examination question appeared on the practice test, locate the practice exam, find the answer, and transfer it to the scantron sheet. The remainder of the questions took far longer to answer than this. The test was structured so that we would answer one question approximately every three minutes (61 questions/180 minutes).
Applying this realistic time management schedule, students who had access to the 10 questions provided in Langdell saved more than 2 minutes per question or approximately 20 minutes during the test. They could use this time to carefully consider and answer other questions. Time is a valuable resource on any law school examination, but particularly so when so few questions are contained in the test as a whole. In short, even if the 10 questions were tossed, the playing field would still not be level.
Prof. Terrell
During the Fall 2004 semester students in Prof. Terrell’s section were offered a pass/fail option. Although those circumstances were different than those presented in the present case, the root cause of the problems is the same – Prof. Terrell.
There is no doubt the Prof. Terrell is very knowledgable about Property. Indeed, his lectures on the developing law of property rights regarding IVF were perhaps the most fascinating of the entire first year of law school. He also gave thought provoking lectures on housing rights for the poor, a topic about which he appears to care greatly. Unfortunately, this passion did not spill over into the remainder of the class. Two entire classes were lost to discussions of Rep. Tom DeLay, the Senate’s filibuster of President Bush’s judicial nominees, and the death penalty. There are all interesting topics but they had nothing to do with Property. As a result the syllabus was not completed, including an introduction to intellectual property, a course that Dean Alfini encouraged all matriculating students in August 2004 to take during his welcoming remarks.
In short, Prof. Terrell seems as if he is bored or does not care much for teaching Property any more, and that boredom has carried over into his examinations. During the Fall he waited until the last moment to draft an exam and as a result was forced to give an old multiple choice final after telling his students all semester that the exam would be essay only. A pass/fail option was the chosen remedy for Prof. Terrell’s actions.
This semester Prof. Terrell apparently put his examination together in a hurry, or with very little care. For instance:
• The examination contained two question #17s.
• One question had answer options “a”, “b” , “c” , and “e.”
• The test contained a question on Shelley’s Case which Prof. Terrell specifically said the last day of class would not be tested subject matter. (If this question was not one of the 10 questions at issue it seems unfair that it be tested and should be tossed from the examination.)
• More importantly, while it may be an accepted professional practice to repeat questions on exams for a series of years, it is clearly not a professional practice to repeat questions after they have been publicly released in the recent past (in this instance approximately 2 years ago). The fact that Prof. Terrell chose to repeat 10 questions that he must have known he had released previously to a prior class only underscores how little he cared about the final or teaching Section C.
Moving Forward
To prevent such an event from occurring again in the future I suggest that a rule be put in place that Langdell scholars must clear with the professors of the relevant sections all materials they intend to distribute to their students. Had this occurred in this instance it is likely that Prof. Terrell would not have placed the 10 questions on his final examination.
Summary
In sum, given that the root cause of the problem is the same, and the unfair time advantage that the Langdell students were de facto provided by virtue of having the questions in advance, making the examination a pass/fail option should be the selected remedy. In addition, procedures to approve all written materials distributed to Langdell students should be put in place.
Dean Rensberger, thank you in advance for your consideration of this serious matter. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at 832-651-3951 or josh_reiss@yahoo.com.
Sincerely,
Joshua Reiss
A fine letter. With our two sections complaining, hopefully the school will do something to help us. They'll heed our rising voices, or whatever they said in N.Y. Times v. Sullivan. That's right, I'm comparing the struggle against Buford to the civil rights movement.
If I were a nerd, I would comment that our combining to fight Terrell is not unlike Rohan and Gondor combining to fight the hordes of Mordor. But I'm not a nerd, so I won't make the comparison.
Sam, you little Hobbit, you. You are of course aware that your beloved Stevenson handed out exam questions to Langdell last semester. Stevenson also emailed select students (I am sure you received the email)--on the day of the exam, no less--hints and clarifications about the essay. Buford is evil, but I don't remember you making such a fuss about our Posner-esque Prof.
On a different note, I think you should develop an illustrated Bluebook--kind of like a comic book. Sure to be a hit.
I didn't know about the Langdell rule until February, so it was too late to complain.
The guys at work have said I need to start up a citation-checking busines and never practice law. An illustrated bluebook would be a nice product to offer. If you want in, it could be Bolt & Haren, P.C., bluebook extraordinaires.
Yeah, I'll buy in on the Bluebook idea. After we make our millions, we should hire Holland to make coffee and check the mail.
sam, if your law firm have a playground, i suspect you would be beat up on it. bluebook nerd! but i wouldn't mind seeing that illustrated blue book. or hey - how about bluebook exercises and examples that are helpful and assist in learning (as opposed to torture)? or is that even possible?
i know! why don't you write a bluebook that's actually user friendly? wait, didn't they do that already and we don't use it? what's that thing called?
Post a Comment
<< Home