“What the fuck” is what’s going through my head after seeing that “Professor Berman has been selected to receive the 2008 Texas Exes Teaching Award for having had a positive influence on the educational experience of university students at the school of law.”
How on Earth is this possible? I had the misfortune of suffering through his Con Law class when I was a 1L. Before taking his class, I actually enjoyed Con Law, now I’ll do anything to avoid anything even resembling it. I didn’t learn a singe thing in his class. I dreaded attending his class even on day’s it didn’t meet. It is easily the worst class, taught by the worst professor, I’ve ever had – and I had Contracts with Rau! At least with Rau I leaned a little about
And I’m not the only one who felt this way. I cannot think of a single person in that class who actually thought it was a good class. Well, maybe one person (she pulled all the good posts, but you remember). Everyone in my small section who I’ve spoken to is in agreement: Berman was bad. Sure there are disagreements about who is good and bad. I liked Sharlot, but know others who didn’t. I couldn’t stand my Civ Pro prof (visiting from u of H), but some in my section actually sent a letter to Powers asking he be considered for a full-time position here. I could go on and on, but no one, and I mean no one, has ever told me they thought Berman was a good professor.
Seriously, how could Berman get any sort of recognition for “having had a positive influence on the educational experience of university students at the school of law”? Here are a few possibilities:
1) It’s a typo. They actually tried to spell Smith but if came out B-E-R-M-A-N.
2) One of the following is true: (a) “positive influence” in this context actually means “irreparable harm”; (b) “educational experience” in this context means “degradation of legal scholarship”; or “at the school of law” really means “at every other law school because of his presence here.”
3) April Fools’ day came late this year.
4) It’s in his contract that he's to get some sort of award regardless of teaching ability.
Then I saw it: Law Mail group: Student Government - SBA Student Contact: Lyons, Katherine J
The reason he got this award because it’s sponsored by SBA. The SBA is absolutely worthless and isn’t able to do anything right. There is no doubt in my mind that the SBA can, and will, fuck up everything it touches. Forget Sager, email SBA.
11 comments:
I find that people's satisfaction with professors is often closely correlated with the grade they received in the class.
That being said, your recent posts reek of jealousy. It's unbecoming.
Anon, you make an interesting point. You may be on to something.
To check this, I had to look up by grade for Con Law (I honestly didn't remember. Than again, I don't remember by grades for any of my classes.). I've commented before that all my grades in law school have been essentially the same. I know exactly where my place on the curve is and I’ve come to accept that. Of all the graded classes I've taken (15), only 4 have been more than .25 off from my median grade. Con Law was not one of these 4 (although it was one of the ones that was Median + .25). I'm sure that ones grade might have an affect on his or her perception of the prof, but not for me, at least not in this case. I can't speak for my classmates.
Eh, Berman's not so bad. He's just sometimes a little too intense for anyone's good. I do think it would benefit everyone if he'd stop asking people what page of the opinion they are referring to, and he should also recognize that the way he tends to dote on one or two students is fairly offensive to everyone else, especially if his preferred students have a lot of awful ideas.
But even if you didn't like the class, you have to admit that the guy is obviously brilliant and occasionally very funny. He also seemed to enjoy being a professor. I think he just tries to push people, which is a good thing, but sometimes he should recognize that students have more than just his class to worry about.
Also, I was apparently in your section. I think we all might have appreciated Berman more if we hadn't already been screwed by Rau. I distinctly recall feeling (and I actually still feel this way) that our section had an awful rotation of professors. And I do mean awful. The only bright lights were Professor Smith and, to a lesser extent, Professor Anderson (the main problem with Professor Anderson being that he was too ready to let just anyone say anything...okay for a while, but it really gets grating at some point).
While I was in law school (so long ago, right?), those sorts of awards went to people like Professor Woolley and Dean Dickerson. Berman was almost universally disliked when I was a 1st year. I had friends who had both him and Rau (section 3 my year), and neither seemed to be liked.
First of all, you didn't have Levinson for Conlaw, so you don't know how bad it can get. Not to downplay your feelings about Berman, but seriously, it can be worse. Much, much worse.
Anyway. (I know I shouldn't admit this here or start out by saying this, but what the hell...) I enjoyed Rau's class a lot, but it makes perfect sense to me how many people don't. I had Berman as a guest speaker in another class, and it seemed to me that, like Rau, you'd either love him or hate him (though their styles are very different) -- "intense" was definitely the right word. (I've gotten the impression from talking to his former students that he assigns an unbelievable amount of work.)
My theory is that professors who are that hardcore tend to get tunnel-vision, so depending on whether or not you're on their wavelength, you'll either love them or hate them, and there will be very little middle ground. Personally, I get very little from profs who just lecture, concentrate on black-letter law, use PowerPoint slides, etc., but I try not to take it personally -- it definitely works for many people, so I don't know how much I can generalize my experiences.
(As an example... I've talked with people who seem to think that Golden's Admin Law class is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but, while I have some grasp on the subject and I like the guy, the class itself is a complete blur to me.
On the other hand, I still remember plenty about Contracts. That's just a fact -- for whatever reason, I learned more from Rau than any other prof. But it's equally clear that my experience wasn't shared by some (or many).
That's a long-winded way of saying "different strokes for different folks," but that's kinda trite, and that's not the main issue I have with this post.
As Anon4 points out, Berman obviously cares a great deal about his subject, and he seems to genuinely want his students to learn. He might not have figured out the how of it yet, but I feel like that sort of enthusiasm is the most basic and critical ingredient of a really good professor. Everything else can be learned over time, or is largely dependent on the individual student, but enthusiasm is priceless, I think.
On that note -- I'm not really sure what your substantive criticisms of Berman are, but my question is: why not mention them to him? It can't hurt now, and even if he has nothing else going for him, he does seem like the sort of professor that might try to take it to heart.
I don't mean that as a challenge,; just that, if it was really as bad as you say, why not try to save some future students a bit of grief? Unlike many other professors, I feel like Berman might actually listen.
Oh, and in the interests of fairness, Anon1 is full of crap. Some of my best grades have come from professors I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy.
While there might be some correlation between one's grade and how much one learned, it's ludicrous to say that most or even some people will change a semester's worth of formulated opinion based on one grade, long after the fact.
On the contrary, I've found that getting a good grade from a professor who didn't teach me anything makes me respect them less, not more.
Anon4 here.
I have to agree with a. Enthusiasm for teaching is really an important trait in a professor, and Berman has that in loads. He also seems to have a genuine intellectual interest in being a legal scholar, which I think is great as well.
Intelligent? yes.
Intense? yes.
Enthusiastic about his subject? yes.
Interested in students learning? yes.
So far, all good.
Expecting way too much in the way of breadth and depth on any given reading? yes.
That was irritating.
However, the absolute worst part of Berman's game, in my opinion, was his petty meanness toward less-favored students, and reliance on intimidation to motivate. Good teachers don't have to do that.
I don't doubt that he's smart, knowledgeable, or enthusiastic; I never said he wasn't. What I do object to is calling him a good teacher. He is condescending. I always got the impression that he was mocking students who didn't parrot back his opinions. He egged on responses that were known to be nonsense while barely even able to conceal his own laughter. He obviously had his favorite students whom he treated differently. Notice I haven't even mentioned his workload.
As for him liking being a professor, hell, who wouldn't? But just because someone likes their job doesn't mean they're good at it. I know I've had a couple jobs I loved but sucked at. Oddly enough, the jobs I was good at, I hated.
I don't think we got screwed in our professors. I'm actually glad I had Rau. Additionally I enjoyed Smith, Sharlot (mainly for fashion tips), and Anderson.
I won't argue whether Berman has the ingredients to make a good teacher, mainly because I don't know what they are. However, whether he has them or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is that whatever ingredients he has, they aren't being used to make him a good teacher now. Maybe that will change in 5 or 10 years, maybe it won't. I really don't care. As for telling him my criticisms, I did that on my evaluation at the end of the semester. What he chooses to do with it is up to him, I really don't care. If he's even half the prick I think he is, he barely gave them a second thought, assuming he even read them.
One interesting note is that despite the defenses put forth here by various Anons, no one said that Berman deserved this award. No one said he "had a positive influence on the educational experience of university students at the school of law." That is the point to my original post. There are other professors here who I believe really have had "positive influence on the educational experience" and Berman isn't one of them. Giving him this award is a joke. I really do wonder what the thought process was that led to this decision.
By the way, why are all the defenses directed to Berman and no one has come to the defense of the SBA?
By the way, why are all the defenses directed to Berman and no one has come to the defense of the SBA?
That's like asking why we'd rather defend Microsoft instead of Enron.
I did that on my evaluation at the end of the semester.
... He did get the award. Maybe it helped. =P
Seriously, we both know they don't read those things and that they're too short anyway. A one-page email, even if anonymous, would be more effective than filling out a dozen of those eval forms.
As for him liking being a professor, hell, who wouldn't? But just because someone likes their job doesn't mean they're good at it.
Didn't say he liked his job. Said he seems to care about teaching -- as in, he wants his students to learn. That's different.
But regardless, there's more than a few profs who don't enjoy teaching the 1L classes. They clearly think it's beneath them. I've never gotten that vibe from Berman, but maybe it's just me. The other profs you mention (Sharlot, Rau, Anderson, et. al.) seem to get a kick out of their 1L classes, so maybe you guys just got lucky. It's not a given by any stretch of the imagination.
One interesting note is that despite the defenses put forth here by various Anons, no one said that Berman deserved this award. No one said he "had a positive influence on the educational experience of university students at the school of law." That is the point to my original post.
Since as you rightly point out, no one really knows what the decision process here is, it's hard to say whether or not Berman fills the criteria. But defending him as an educator strikes me as tantamount to defending his receipt of the award. I can't speak for anyone else, but my argument was that it's not defensible to assert that he absolutely didn't deserve it. Some people like his teaching style. Some don't. Given the opaqueness of the process, I'm not sure it's possible to answer the question you pose.
There are other professors here who I believe really have had "positive influence on the educational experience" and Berman isn't one of them. Giving him this award is a joke. I really do wonder what the thought process was that led to this decision.
I can't believe I didn't think of this until now, but has anyone considered that maybe the award isn't given out to the same person multiple times (or they try to avoid it)? The faculty's not that huge...
Berman's class was my favorite of 1L year. This really isn't saying much, as I do believe we got scr3w3d on our professors that year (especially in the fall semester -- wtf??)(I had Lonnie, too).
Berman very much deserves this award. I might be just one of his sycophantic "preferred students" but obviously there were enough of us who voted him in to win the Exes award in the first place. I know loads of 2Ls from his class last year who think so, too. These things aren't just handed out at K.Lyons' beck and call, ya know.
Not a "good teacher"? (Do you think that Sharlot WAS a good one, or something? Cuz that would be ridonk.) Bermania, like Rau, challenged us to step out of whatever law school comfort zones we had and actually bust it and learn. The difference was that Berman laid out a framework for understanding the constitution, while Rau did ... I actually still don't have any clue what Rau did for us.
Maybe I just had the foresight to brown-nose my way to office hours enough to actually get to know dude, but definitely one of the only good teachers I've had at UT.
Post a Comment