January 11, 2012
Merits brief for Jackson and Miller...
finally arrived in my in-box this morning. Here they are:
UPDATE: The Jackson brief appears to have the most "action" of these two, though both are worth a close read as we think about how we might further refine our amicus. I hope tonight to be able to work in some cites/ideas and post a new draft by 10am on Thursday. Then, perhaps, any/all who might like to meet to discuss final plan can come by my office Friday afternoon.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Merits brief for Jackson and Miller...:
Your comment is very good.http://www.coachbagsoutletsales.com/
Posted by: coach bags | May 2, 2012 11:14:08 PM
The trouble with thinking you went to a great law school is that most of us only go to one, so we have no comparisons.
W&L is known for its fabulous legal clinics. I was in one, and can say it was the most valuable parts of my legal education and career. http://www.atcoachoutletsonline.com/
I thought all schools were this good! Then I went into the world and heard about programs (or lack thereof) in other law schools. Most did not hold a candle to W&L. http://www.saleincoachoutlet.com/
Posted by: Coach Factory Outlet | May 11, 2012 11:40:49 PM
Your point, Mark, seems to track a lot of the debate around No Child Left Behind. In its best spirit, exams track learning and point to institutional effectiveness, but inevitably they devolve into grade-grubbing goals rather than a means to the goal of learning. In theory, learning to learn and all that nice stuff should also boost students' ultimate grades, but that does require (a) good students and (b) really great teachers. In the absence of either, "teaching to the test" could be the only way forward -- and, some argue, better than the alternative (not teaching much at all). I hesitate to put law schools in this same set, but the parallels do interest me.
Posted by: New Adidas Shoes | Jul 19, 2012 5:22:27 AM