Osler's Razor

It seems to me that your definition of fairness is more akin to a concept of equality than anything else. Equality isn't always fair. Sometimes, you gotta show mercy in order to be fair.

I guess my "definition" of fairness would include mercy. I quote definition because I really have no definition (or at least, the best I can come up with is "equity," which doesn't really move the ball forward, does it?). Fairness is like obscenity -- you know it when you see it.
 

I agree with the Prof. and not simply because his idea of fairness is favorable to my position. I won't expound on fairness, because I can't say it any better.

But I would like to reply to Anonymous because what he says reflects upon my character. As everyone knows, I'm engaged to one of the members on the TOC team. It is easy to believe that I've helped him in preparation for this exam. But if you question our integrity, please don't be afraid to come and talk to us or e-mail us.
 

Individuals don't want what is fair; they want what is in their best interest. I could write forever about fairness from an economic standpoint, but nobody would care enough to read it. Instead I’ll make my own complaint.

It would be unfair to me and the rest of Baylor Law, if the students were unable to compete because they had to take a final at the same time as everyone else. It would take away from our school’s national reputation, and depreciate the value of my degree.
 

I think everyone, even the author, has changed the argument from what it originally was into what they want to argue about. Nobody has said do not let them have extra time when they get back. The argument was that the time they get should be equal to the time other students got. However, some of the mock trial kids got significantly more time for certain finals than the rest of the students.
 

To put it in perspective, the mock trial teams don't get entire reading days to study like everyone else. While everyone else is studying all day for an exam, they are busy preparing for competition. When the new quarter starts, it's pretty tough to fit in study time. So it's not exactly unfair that they have more days to study for the test, because as far as time to study, several days of studying a couple hours each day is the same as having 2 dead days to study.
 

I had some thoughts about fairness,and I wrote much more than would be appropriate for this comment. If you want to read what I have to say about fairness, go to http://craiglpankratz.blogspot.com
 

Is it "fair" that students who are having to do the additional work to prepare for the TOC are also having to prepare for and take finals along side other students with a lighter load (without the added stress and time commitment called for in preparation for the TOC)? Certainly everyone recognizes that these competitions demand a lot of extra work. Because Baylor is on the quarter system, other schools don't have the conflict with finals. However the TOC demands work right up to and crossing over into finals.

Doesn't this put the TOC members is a worse position in relation to all others taking final exams. That conflict is just impossible to resolve without some exceptions in those instances where where there is a direct conflict between the actual competition and a scheduled final exam.

No one seems to complain that the TOC members are more overworked than the rest of the PC students. Noy one classmate or professor is crying for "equality" and demanding that team members get a big break across the board based on the added hours they are required to put in of TOC prep rime, travel time or competition time, all on top of the cruel demands of PC and finals. (Also, not one of the other schools nor any of the TOC judges cut Baylor any slack because Baylor was in the middle of finals either.)

So, why then, if we acknowledge the additional workload and we all agree that the entire school benefits when those few do well, do we over look that added burden and complain when they are given an alternative test date, and yes, even some added time to prepare, in thpse dituations where there exist a direct conflict? Isn't that just a bit petty?

About giving the team members an opportunity to cheat. The school is on the honor system, but frankly, if anyone has a mind to cheat, they will find a way to do it. However, think about it. Aren't the cheaters usually the lazy ones who don't prepare rather than the ones who sign up for added work, like a competition in the middle of finals?

So, as to giving the TOC participants a later test date when there was a conflict: isn't that really the "fair" thing to do? Isn't that, in fact, the least that can be done toward equalizing the added workload they took on for everyone's ultimate benefit?
 

Except that that's why you guys get grade points...to make up for any detriment you might receive as a result of having a "heavier load" during the class. Plus, that was a detriment you willingly took on and one that will benefit you in other ways (like with employers). On the other hand, we didn't take a vote or willingly decide to give other students an advantage over us. Finally, a lot of it comes down to actual study time at the end. I'm sure you were extremely busy during the quarter, but if you were in class, you were taking the same notes I was. Then, it's just a matter of who can commit more to memory and having extra time certainly aids that.
 

I am going to take 5:49 in turn.

First, the TOC kids took one final alongside the students with the lighter load. Also, for that final they had more open days to devote to the evidence final because they were not taking PC with everyone else. So, to answer the question, No. The TOC kids are not in a worse position. I would have much rather had 4 full days to do nothing but evidence than had to study for pc, take pc, then have to turn it around and try to study for evidence with less time than the TOC kids.

As far as the TOC kids being overworked. Nobody doubts or questions the hard work that is put in by the kids on teams. However, the break comes in class. As for the TOC kids, they always seemed to catch Powell on days when they could screw up but not get a memo. I did not think it was a coincidence.

Also, if you want to stand on how well you make the whole school look, shouldnt we make it all contingent on how well you do in the competition. With that rationale the SMU kids should get as much time as they need but the TOC kids should get no break? I know that argument is ridiculous but so is the argument that the mock trial kids are selflessly trying to help out their classmates and we should tolerate a little unfairness because they are just trying to help us out.

Finally, as to the cheater "logic" of the post. I think it is crazy to say only lazy people cheat. Just because someone did a mock trial team does not make them any less likely to cheat. Futhermore, anyone would be tempted to cheat when they knew they could not get caught--as is the situation described in these posts.

I personally have not been too upset by the special treatment for the team members. However, I do not think it has been fair but thats just how things work around here. Welcome to Baylor "Fixin' to Fall a Ton of Spots in the Rankings" Law School.
 

haters
 

I really don't think it is so much of an issue for the TOC kids as for some of the other kids who took off class this week to study for Evidence. That's where my griping would come in... those that skipped class for half the week.
 

We are not all worthy of equal treatment at Baylor. Remember, some people are just better than others.
 

Life isn't fair. Grow up and deal with it.
 

Yesterday was Veterans Day. I doubt the young men in the first landing craft to land on the beaches of Normandy thought it was "fair" that they drew that duty, but they carried on and now we can argue about the scheduling of final exams.

Just a reminder to keep an eye on the ball. In ten years your gpa is just another number and I hope it doesn't define any of us.
 

bluegapdrifter:
I appreciate the comment in support of the military, etc., but I don't think the basic argument that some people have or had it much worse is appropriate. Just because there are worse problems to have doesn't mean that this one is irrelevant. You can always make an argument that someone has it worse. Does that mean that we should ignore all problems? Or perhaps just those deemed unworthy by others?
I don't by any means intend this as a personal attack on you, I just don't think it's fair to trivialize a valid concern.
And just to clarify, I think the underlying lack of consideration or even awareness is the real issue, not just the effect it will have on our grades.
 

9:51-- You think that it is really such a big deal that someone else got to take the test late because they were on some team? You REALLY sound like a whiner. And also, it sounds like the prof. does have a lot of consideration, to actually spend this amount of time to discuss his reasoning, and I don't see what the big problem is-- someone might have a slight advantage in taking the test because they did some competition?

It really does seem like piddly-ass whining by someone who is damn spoiled. Blue Gap Drifter was very politely pointing that out by explaining what a real challenge is. If I knew you, I probably wouldn't be so polite.
 

I believe this is beginning to qualify under the "rants" portion of the blog
 

10:02--

You are probably too harsh. I have some sympathy for the original poster. When i was in law school, I made a stink about torts class going too long. In what was perhaps the most elegant and thorough smack-down I have ever experienced, Guido Calabresi took on my point and refuted it in slow, excruciating steps. It was one of the best lessons I ever learned. Complaining about fairness works best when you are asserting unfairness suffered by someone else, and always must be done with a sense of proportion.

Of course, I still make the same mistakes, and feel too sorry about myself, but the memory of Dean Calabresi's response usually snaps me out of it.
 

I think it really undermines any point you're trying to make when you resort to personal attacks using name-calling and offensive language.
(Obviously, Prof. Osler, this was directed to the comment before yours)