LP for Legal Process
As I finish up my final year of law school, I have been thinking about the professors I have had during my time here. Dear professors, the curriculum committee has finished meeting, and the grades are in.
General comment: U of T Law sure has a strong cohort of professors! Most of my professors have met my high standards of teaching excellence, so you should all be very proud of yourselves.
Larissa Katz: HH.
Delightful, clear, professional, organized, wants students to learn, and well-dressed. She inspires me to voluntarily participate, which is a pleasant surprise for this tired third year student.
Brenda Cossman: H.
Her sass would earn her an H, but she backs it up with interesting course material and clear lectures.
Martha Shaffer: H.
Or, as one student put it: “I love Shaffer, but I have some really strong professors this term, so Shaffer gets an H. If I’d had Shaffer another term with different profs, she might’ve gotten an HH!”
Malcolm Thorburn: H.
What a treat to experience evidence law in an intimate 10-person seminar setting, but with the actual learning of a big lecture course. This is no 1L small group course.
Lorraine Weinrib: P.
Constitutional advocacy was right over dinner time. Scheduling wasn’t her fault, but grades are arbitrary, and I’m hungry between 4–7pm, so P it is.
Maria Banda: P.
When I haven’t done the readings ahead of time, I’m pretty confused in class. Her teaching improves a lot when I’ve done the readings. She should be more consistent.
Ed Iacobucci: P. Dean-a-ling-a-ling. I’m really disappointed that he’s never stopped by my study group while dressed in a dumb costume to give us some irrelevant news.
Legal Process (anyone): LP.
Nobody wants to take this course; nobody wants to teach this course. Not their fault.
Faculty are advised that, per the Academic Handbook, the only basis for appeal is the unreasonableness of the grade.
