Terrell Schmerrell

During finals, I planned on writing a letter to the school complaining about ole Buford. Recently, several people have asked about that letter, so here it is. I encourage all who agree with it to email it to Rensberger (jeffrens –at- stcl.edu). Feel free to edit and change it to suit your individual taste and preferences. If you are so inclined, point others to this post so that they too can complain about Buford “the shart” Terrell. With any luck and a large response, the school might help us out like his students from last fall (they could choose between their grade and pass/fail).


Dear Dean Rensberger:

I am writing this email to express my concern regarding Professor Terrell's Property I exam for Section B. My concerns are best grouped into three categories: Terrell's giving exam questions to Langdell students, the form of the exam and the content of the exam.

After taking the exam, I learned Professor Terrell had included several questions previously given to his Langdell class. Estimates of how many such questions were included range from six to twelve of a sixty-question exam. Whatever the number, my understanding is that professors are strictly forbidden from giving exam questions to Langdell classes; this understanding is based on specific comments made by Dean Alfini at a lunch meeting with LRW II sections. If there is in fact a policy or rule against such giving of questions, then a significant percentage (10%-20%) of Professor Terrell's exam consisted of illegitimate questions.

My next major point of contention with the exam is Professor Terrell's choice to make the exam "open computer." Students were allowed to access anything on their computer, unencumbered by ExamSoft; the only limitation was that students could not access the internet. I was of the understanding that the school's exam policy only allowed the use of a computer in conjunction with ExamSoft. The Registrar’s on-line guideline regarding computer use during finals, signed by Dean Pilkington and located at http://www.stcl.edu/registrar/registrar1/examsoft.htm, reads as follows: “The only laptops allowed in examination rooms are those being used for taking final exams with the ExamSoft software.” Such a flagrant violation of exam procedures undermines the strength of the rules and made it impossible for a student to truthfully sign the pledge sheet.

My final concern deals with the actual content of Professor Terrell's exam. Several answers directly contradicted his in-class lecturing. In class, we would often engage in detailed hypotheticals on interesting and developing areas of the law. I feel that such discussions were the high-point of Professor Terrell's class. At the close of these discussions, he would tell us that the answer to the question discussed was either state-specific or still developing. On his exam, he questioned us on several of these hypothetical situations, asking us what was either the "best" or "most likely" outcome. This would not be a problem on an essay test, but it is very difficult to answer such a question on a multiple choice test. In class, he would stress that something was still “in-the-air” and undecided by the courts, yet he would expect us to predict the outcome on his multiple choice exam. There were at least six such questions that, based on his class lectures, are impossible to answer with any degree of certainty.

In addition to his questions contradicting his own lectures, Professor Terrell also asked questions contradicting the correct and actual law of property. Over the course of the semester, Professor Terrell taught several, perhaps a half-dozen, rules that are directly contradicted by writings on the subject of Property. These aren't mere disagreements over controversial points of law; Professor Terrell often flew in the face of unanimous authority. When asked about this in class, he stated that the other professors were simply wrong in their treatises and horn-books. Professor Terrell would have us believe that every single book on property, including the case book he assigned, is incorrect, and only he knows the true rule. He then proceeded to place at least four of these issues on the exam; he forced us choose between the answer he felt is correct and the actual correct answer.

I am not sure what, if any, remedial action the school should take. I do, however, urge the school to take some action. The exam procedures are intended to be rules that guide the students and the faculty so as to ensure a fair and efficient awarding of grades. Violating those rules seriously undermines their purposes and effectiveness, as it deprives students of protections afforded by the rule and encourages all, students and faculty alike, to take liberties with these and other rules and policies. Furthermore, remedial action by the school would not be unprecedented after the fall semester incident with Professor Terrell. My understanding is students were ultimately given the choice to receive either a grade or pass/fail credit. I feel the relief given to those students is fair and should be considered for the students of Professor Terrell's Spring 2005 Section B students.