Blecker is at it again, defending the wall!

realtime said:

Agreed. As just one example, a large percentage of the best and smartest lawyers I have ever met attended BU law school. Fine school, but well outside the consensus top 5 (and even top 10) law schools.

Click to expand...

Still hovers around top 15-25 no? I was strongly considering attending there if I went to the US and couldn't pull in Harvard (wanted to watch the Pats play). Alas, your economy was weak at the time, so I decided to stay in Canada. What a difference 3 years makes.

The Brandon Five said:

The Ivies (IMO) are hard to get into but not as hard to graduate from (at least as an undergrad). To wit:

Substantiating Fears of Grade Inflation, Dean Says Median Grade at Harvard College Is A-, Most Common Grade Is A | News | The Harvard Crimson


It's like the University of Lake Wobegon.

Click to expand...

If your pool is the top 1% of all students, the most likely grade is an A. I think the schools just instructors just don't "look" for reasons to downgrade submitted work as they had in the past.

Jlaff said:

I can definitely say, that no matter what the topic, in 3rd year if I'm asked to write an additional paper (these things take extensive amounts of work btw), and the potential, again the POTENTIAL prize is $1,000, after paying get $80k a year to go there, my response is an immediate GFY.

Click to expand...

Same here. The only way I could see someone doing that would be if he/she: (i) already had a paper in the "can" that could be submitted as is (or with minimal revisions); or (ii) was really desperate for an additional credential -- any credential.

Jlaff said:

Still hovers around top 15-25 no? I was strongly considering attending there if I went to the US and couldn't pull in Harvard (wanted to watch the Pats play). Alas, your economy was weak at the time, so I decided to stay in Canada. What a difference 3 years makes.

Click to expand...

Sounds like you made the right choice. I'd say BU is definite top-25, maybe borderline top-20. When I was applying to law school in the 90's, I was told to avoid BU (and Georgetown) because the students there were hyper-competitive/cutthroat. I'm not sure where that rumor started or if there is any truth to it now or then, but I've never heard that from anyone who actually went there.

patman52 said:

If your pool is the top 1% of all students, the most likely grade is an A. I think the schools just instructors just don't "look" for reasons to downgrade submitted work as they had in the past.

Click to expand...

In other words: the work isn't any harder than at any other school?

patman52 said:

If your pool is the top 1% of all students, the most likely grade is an A. I think the schools just instructors just don't "look" for reasons to downgrade submitted work as they had in the past.

Click to expand...

Not sure I agree with that. The pool is the top 1% of all HIGH SCHOOL students. One thing about great high school students . . . quite a few of them make terrible college students. There is more than enough variation in the quality of the work product among the students even at a school like Harvard that a wide spread in grading is perfectly appropriate.

letekro said:

Sir (Madam?), your inability to comprehend the written word has grown tiresome. If you don't have a lie for me from the Wells Report, then I really care not for what you have to say. Since, according to you, there are "numerous outright lies" in the Wells Report, providing just one example should be a piece of cake.

And no, I never said the Wells Report was "legitimate", because I don't even know what that word means in this context. The Wells Report is a document that the NFL paid for that was written in a way to make the feeble minded believe that it was written from an independent, objective viewpoint. It is not, and was never intended to be. That doesn't mean it contains lies; rather, it contains facts, but presented in a way most favorable to the client (meaning most harmful to Brady, in this case).

Click to expand...

WTF is with you. I gave you exactly the lie that was in the Wells report. YOU are the one who can't comprehend the written word. Furthermore, you insist on putting words into other people's mouths to try and make yourself look smart. You're not. Fact is I never claimed you said that the Wells report was "legitimate". So, take your BS and go away. It really is pathetic that you have sat here time and again dismissed the likes of Blecker but offer up nothing.

realtime said:

Madam (Sir?), your inability to comprehend the written word has grown tiresome.

My original comment that got your panties in a wad was as follows:

"The Oberman prize is sort of like winning an award for being the best left-footed long snapper in the NFL. It's not really that impressive in and of itself, but you are in the NFL, which is more than a lot of people can say."

This comment both acknowledges that Harvard students are "already close to the cream of the crop" (by analogizing attending Harvard to making it to the NFL) and acknowledges that the award "raises them up . . . slightly".

And thank you for finally acknowledging (although with a disappointing lack of specificity given your otherwise precise knowledge of Blecker's biography) that there is a "very small number of submissions" for this award that you find so impressive. The fact that there is one professor assigned per topic is only one piece of evidence that there are so few submissions. Another big reason, also noted in my post (although couched in "condescending" language that you were probably too offended to process), is that not many students are going to voluntarily write a paper in their 3rd year of law school when the prize is just $1,000 and the admiration of fan boys/gals on Patriots message boards.

I hope you are done filling this thread with your faux outrage. If not, please, please, PLEASE use the word "audacity" again in your next post. It makes you sound like the offended wife of a wealthy aristocrat (as in "I can't believe the help had the AUDACITY to set foot in the parlor") and, unlike the rest of your posts, is at least mildly entertaining.

Click to expand...

WOW. You really are the biggest arrogant person next to Roger Goodell. You've brought nothing but BS to the thread and you act like your King.

The only thing I acknowledged was that you were talking out your ass. But as is typical of some dumb arse, you have to spin things to try and make yourself look good. Do yourself and everyone else a favor and go back to whatever troll hole you came from..

DaBruinz said:

WOW. You really are the biggest arrogant person next to Roger Goodell. You've brought nothing but BS to the thread and you act like your King.

The only thing I acknowledged was that you were talking out your ass. But as is typical of some dumb arse, you have to spin things to try and make yourself look good. Do yourself and everyone else a favor and go back to whatever troll hole you came from..

Click to expand...

The word is "you're", you dumb arse. And I don't see the word "audacity" anywhere, so you missed an opportunity to elevate your post from its usual status as worthless garbage.

DaBruinz said:

WTF is with you. I gave you exactly the lie that was in the Wells report. YOU are the one who can't comprehend the written word. Furthermore, you insist on putting words into other people's mouths to try and make yourself look smart. You're not. Fact is I never claimed you said that the Wells report was "legitimate". So, take your BS and go away. It really is pathetic that you have sat here time and again dismissed the likes of Blecker but offer up nothing.

Click to expand...

I'm not dismissing Blecker. I'm also not a judge on the 2d Circuit or a law clerk to a judge on the 2d circuit, with the associated impeccable credentials, who have read amicus briefs submitted by the absolute cream of the academic crop. Mr. Blecker is not that. He also has chosen to focus his scholarship is support of a legal position that most non-right wingers find to be distasteful. I think the clerks will read his letter, I have no idea whether they will find it persuasive, I just know that, as my initial post said "As far as Amici go," he is not someone whose name alone will carry great weight.

letekro said:

I'm not dismissing Blecker. I'm also not a judge on the 2d Circuit or a law clerk to a judge on the 2d circuit, with the associated impeccable credentials, who have read amicus briefs submitted by the absolute cream of the academic crop. Mr. Blecker is not that. He also has chosen to focus his scholarship is support of a legal position that most non-right wingers find to be distasteful. I think the clerks will read his letter, I have no idea whether they will find it persuasive, I just know that, as my initial post said "As far as Amici go," he is not someone whose name alone will carry great weight.

Click to expand...

Yes, you are dismissing Blecker. You have called into question his credentials several times, including in your most recent post. You clearly don't know wtf you are talking about when it comes to Blecker. Furthermore, you don't seem to comprehend the difference between the Amicus Curiae Brief and the legal filings regarding Clement's lying.
I'd tell you to stop while you're behind, but you aren't capable of that.

The Brandon Five said:

In other words: the work isn't any harder than at any other school?

Click to expand...

No, the subjects are presented in more depth. But that talent pool is is such that they are still able to pull an "A". 30 and 40 years ago the Ivy students were mostly legacy, now the pool is made from kids who competed with their peers for 4 years at high school, and compete even more fiercely at college.
This goes for any of the top 25 schools in the country, not just the Ivies.

patman52 said:

No, the subjects are presented in more depth. But that talent pool is is such that they are still able to pull an "A". 30 and 40 years ago the Ivy students were mostly legacy, now the pool is made from kids who competed with their peers for 4 years at high school, and compete even more fiercely at college.
This goes for any of the top 25 schools in the country, not just the Ivies.

Click to expand...

I haven't seen any evidence of that. Harvard used the same Organic Chem book as UMass.

A "C" is supposed to represent "average". You can't have an entire population that is above its own average. Grade inflation is not just rampant at the Ivies, but I it seems like they have turned it into an art form.

realtime said:

Not sure I agree with that. The pool is the top 1% of all HIGH SCHOOL students. One thing about great high school students . . . quite a few of them make terrible college students. There is more than enough variation in the quality of the work product among the students even at a school like Harvard that a wide spread in grading is perfectly appropriate.

Click to expand...

Well, I will disagree that quite a few of the applicants that get accepted to these top tier schools make terrible college students. I think quite a few of them make 1st semester students.

The Brandon Five said:

I haven't seen any evidence of that. Harvard used the same Organic Chem book as UMass.

A "C" is supposed to represent "average". You can't have an entire population that is above its own average. Grade inflation is not just rampant at the Ivies, but I it seems like they have turned it into an art form.

Click to expand...

An "A" is for mastery of the subject, not for your ranking in a group of students who also mastered the subject. Lesser grades are given to students who don't master the subject by varying degrees.

patman52 said:

If your pool is the top 1% of all students, the most likely grade is an A. I think the schools just instructors just don't "look" for reasons to downgrade submitted work as they had in the past.

Click to expand...

The reason this happens is because students care more about grades than learning. It wasn't always this way. I wish advisors would simply tell them that at this level, learning is more important. We're training kids to think that only immediate assessments matter (grades, tests) whereas in the past, learning was considered a more holistic experience.

Most of the professors simply do not have the same experience with assessment and grading, so they put a lot less stock in it. Which makes them more willing to avoid confrontation.

Plus, at most universities, 1/4th of every class is going to be stocked with kids that don't put forth much effort. They want Cs, they get Cs and Ds. What I see in my position at a university is a lot of A-s, As, a smattering of Cs and Ds. The most forgotten grade of all is the B-range. When I was "trained" to teach back in the early 90s, the people overseeing us would throw a fit if our class's GPA was not within .15 of the supposed target of 2.7 (a B-). That too was a bogus arbitrary standard.

After grading kids with Bs (an average of 3.0s) for several years, I was once brought into my supervisor's office and I was told that my entire portfolio of publication, service, awards was going to sail me through the tenure process, but I was given a talking to about my teaching evaluations, was told that this would be a hangup for some on the college's appointment committee. They asked if I needed help and to think about what I could to improve things in the 2 years I had until tenure review. So, I experimented. I jumped my averages from 3.0 to 3.3 or 3.5. My evaluations skyrocketed. When I met with my supervisor the next year, he asked what I had done to jack up my evaluations to the top of the department. I answered: "I'm giving them higher grades." He gave me one of those pointed finger "right-on" gestures and nodded, yes. What does that tell you?

There are legislators in Texas who want to make teachers accountable to the customer (students) so that teachers will be rewarded with higher salaries if they have stellar evaluations. If they have poor evaluations, their salary drops. This is a real proposal.

Just imagine if the NFL worked this way. Imagine if the Terry Glenns and Adalius Thomases of the world could determine the worth of the coaches.

upstater1 said:

The reason this happens is because students care more about grades than learning. It wasn't always this way. I wish advisors would simply tell them that at this level, learning is more important. We're training kids to think that only immediate assessments matter (grades, tests) whereas in the past, learning was considered a more holistic experience.

Most of the professors simply do not have the same experience with assessment and grading, so they put a lot less stock in it. Which makes them more willing to avoid confrontation.

Plus, at most universities, 1/4th of every class is going to be stocked with kids that don't put forth much effort. They want Cs, they get Cs and Ds. What I see in my position at a university is a lot of A-s, As, a smattering of Cs and Ds. The most forgotten grade of all is the B-range. When I was "trained" to teach back in the early 90s, the people overseeing us would throw a fit if our class's GPA was not within .15 of the supposed target of 2.7 (a B-). That too was a bogus arbitrary standard.

After grading kids with Bs (an average of 3.0s) for several years, I was once brought into my supervisor's office and I was told that my entire portfolio of publication, service, awards was going to sail me through the tenure process, but I was given a talking to about my teaching evaluations, was told that this would be a hangup for some on the college's appointment committee. They asked if I needed help and to think about what I could to improve things in the 2 years I had until tenure review. So, I experimented. I jumped my averages from 3.0 to 3.3 or 3.5. My evaluations skyrocketed. When I met with my supervisor the next year, he asked what I had done to jack up my evaluations to the top of the department. I answered: "I'm giving them higher grades." He gave me one of those pointed finger "right-on" gestures and nodded, yes. What does that tell you?

There are legislators in Texas who want to make teachers accountable to the customer (students) so that teachers will be rewarded with higher salaries if they have stellar evaluations. If they have poor evaluations, their salary drops. This is a real proposal.

Just imagine if the NFL worked this way. Imagine if the Terry Glenns and Adalius Thomases of the world could determine the worth of the coaches.

Click to expand...

And then add the internet and all the resources it brings to boost your mastery of a test subject. You want 5 takes on one side of an argument, your research is done in mins. Not 1 hour to get dressed and go back and forth to the library. Spell and grammar check, Just word processing over typing. God, I used log tables and slide rules.

The Brandon Five said:

I haven't seen any evidence of that. Harvard used the same Organic Chem book as UMass.

A "C" is supposed to represent "average". You can't have an entire population that is above its own average. Grade inflation is not just rampant at the Ivies, but I it seems like they have turned it into an art form.

Click to expand...

the term "average" is a misnomer....... a "C" is achieving 75%

people have become good at realizing the appropriate knowledge on a topic in order to make the grade....in other words, they're 'learning to the test' ........ applying that knowledge in a practical manner is lost on a great many of these 'A' students

If your goal is to become a law school professor (which seems like a pretty sweet gig actually), having an ivy league degree is pretty important. Other than that, where you went to law school doesn't really matter all that much.

Even my crappy little law school (NYLS) boasts a Supreme Court Justice (John Marshall Harlan II) and great legal minds like Judge Judy , among its notable alumni.

patman52 said:

And then add the internet and all the resources it brings to boost your mastery of a test subject. You want 5 takes on one side of an argument, your research is done in mins. Not 1 hour to get dressed and go back and forth to the library. Spell and grammar check, Just word processing over typing. God, I used log tables and slide rules.

Click to expand...

So your point could be summarized this way: The grading system isn't supposed to be a Bell curve, it is supposed to measure learning. Today, as contrasted with say 20 years ago, there are more tools available to enable students to master a subject more thoroughly and more quickly. Thus more "A" grades are appropriate, as more students are mastering more learning and are able to demonstrate it.

Did I get that right? If so, I hadn't ever thought of it that way; much obliged for the insight.

I can see why that would be a hard sell on a football board, with its orientation toward competition as a cultural norm and "correctness." Through the lens of competition, grading should be about ranking students.