A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
georgej
Posts: 2373
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 12:55 am

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby georgej » Mon Apr 27, 2015 11:03 am

I'm gonna go on record saying nobody should get extra time on exams ever, but people should get more or less adderall depending on the severity of their condition. Seems fair to me. I think giving ADD peeps extra time marginalizes those with other mental problems who don't get the same considerations. If, like, a depressive is bummed as fuck during the exam he's hardly going to be able to write anything, but we don't let him postpone it until he feels better, we just let him take some meds or whatever and hope for the best.

Anecdote: a dude broke his hand last semester so that he couldn't even type fast and the administration didn't give him extra time. That guy has got to be pissed he was excluded. Better to just make it cutthroat with no accommodations (except for, like, Steven Hawking wheelchair bros). It's just too easy to game the system, and people with real ADD can just tweak on addies harder and probably get the same evening of the playing field anyway.

User avatar
PourMeTea
Posts: 6508
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:32 am

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby PourMeTea » Mon Apr 27, 2015 2:44 pm

I have heard that a pretty prominent professor is changing their exam for next year from a horserace. Not because of extra-time faker douchebags per se, but because someone who happened to get extra time on a horserace that also knew nothing about the subject had an extra hour and a half to outline dump despite making terrible arguments and ended up with one of the highest grades in the class by virtue of having more words on a page. Maybe that will catch on.

User avatar
PourMeTea
Posts: 6508
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:32 am

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby PourMeTea » Mon Apr 27, 2015 2:46 pm

Anyways maybe try soliciting accommodations for incontinence https://answers.yahoo.com/question/inde ... 635AAHwNFZ

User avatar
yomisterd
Posts: 1556
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 12:52 pm

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby yomisterd » Mon Apr 27, 2015 2:46 pm

PourMeTea wrote:I have heard that a pretty prominent professor is changing their exam for next year from a horserace. Not because of extra-time faker douchebags per se, but because someone who happened to get extra time on a horserace that also knew nothing about the subject had an extra hour and a half to outline dump despite making terrible arguments and ended up with one of the highest grades in the class by virtue of having more words on a page. Maybe that will catch on.


ಠ_ಠ how do you get the highest grade just by having more words what is this mavis beacon

User avatar
georgej
Posts: 2373
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 12:55 am

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby georgej » Mon Apr 27, 2015 2:58 pm

PourMeTea wrote:Anyways maybe try soliciting accommodations for incontinence https://answers.yahoo.com/question/inde ... 635AAHwNFZ


:oops:

User avatar
twenty
Posts: 3153
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:17 pm

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby twenty » Mon Apr 27, 2015 3:43 pm

PourMeTea wrote:I have heard that a pretty prominent professor is changing their exam for next year from a horserace. Not because of extra-time faker douchebags per se, but because someone who happened to get extra time on a horserace that also knew nothing about the subject had an extra hour and a half to outline dump despite making terrible arguments and ended up with one of the highest grades in the class by virtue of having more words on a page. Maybe that will catch on.


To be fair, this seems to be a failing of race horse exams in general. I spoke to one professor after the exam who was almost openly hostile - something to the effect of "your arguments were actually spectacularly terrible; congratulations on typing spectacularly terrible arguments significantly faster than your peers." Of course, using a non-race horse exam for something like torts seems like an equally bad idea. Oh, look, everyone knows how negligence works. Fantastic. Now the curve turns on miniscule counterarguments and how much you can cram into a word-limited essay.

The fact that having extra time is such a big deal should be an indicator of a broken pedagogical system. Yeah, it sucks that people manage to get fake diagnostics for things they don't really have, but the reason they weren't doing this in college was because either 1) they weren't aware enough of the benefit, or 2) that the benefit was significantly smaller back then.

Nomo
Posts: 700
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2014 2:06 am

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby Nomo » Mon Apr 27, 2015 3:45 pm

justkeepswimming794 wrote:As someone who was diagnosed with learning disabilities at a very young age, this sort of thing is really a shame. The entire point in exam accommodations is to level the playing field. Some people are very slow readers due to a learning disability (I'm talking at least 4x times as slow as their peers) but once they absorb the fact pattern they have no trouble at all issue spotting/formulating their answers with sophisticated analysis whatsoever. These people have known of their disability (at the LATEST) since the beginning of college. To be fair, it can be fairly easy to compensate with a learning disability - if you have otherwise high intelligence - during middle school and high school (depending on the school).

The point is that this really sucks for the people who actually need these accommodations, because someone who was already top of their class - chances are - doesnt need extended time on an exam. Clearly they are getting by just fine. People that abuse the system like this are undermining the entire point in accommodating those with actual need.


Does there come a time when it just doesn't make sense to level the playing field anymore? I mean, if you read that slowly are you going to charge your client for it? What do you do when you're pressed up against a tight deadline? Doesn't very slow reading actually make you a lesser lawyer in some ways? Isn't it one of the foundational lawyering skills - being able to read and comprehend difficult material in a fairly quick time frame. I'm curious about your thoughts on this?

Now I'll agree that a 4 hour issue spotter isn't the best type of exam. Maybe it makes more sense to just give everyone 8 hours, or a full day.

User avatar
MistakenGenius
Posts: 825
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:18 pm

Post removed.

Postby MistakenGenius » Mon Apr 27, 2015 4:19 pm

Post removed.
Last edited by MistakenGenius on Sun Dec 13, 2015 9:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
alphasteve
Posts: 16279
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby alphasteve » Mon Apr 27, 2015 4:26 pm

Nomo wrote:
justkeepswimming794 wrote:As someone who was diagnosed with learning disabilities at a very young age, this sort of thing is really a shame. The entire point in exam accommodations is to level the playing field. Some people are very slow readers due to a learning disability (I'm talking at least 4x times as slow as their peers) but once they absorb the fact pattern they have no trouble at all issue spotting/formulating their answers with sophisticated analysis whatsoever. These people have known of their disability (at the LATEST) since the beginning of college. To be fair, it can be fairly easy to compensate with a learning disability - if you have otherwise high intelligence - during middle school and high school (depending on the school).

The point is that this really sucks for the people who actually need these accommodations, because someone who was already top of their class - chances are - doesnt need extended time on an exam. Clearly they are getting by just fine. People that abuse the system like this are undermining the entire point in accommodating those with actual need.


Does there come a time when it just doesn't make sense to level the playing field anymore? I mean, if you read that slowly are you going to charge your client for it? What do you do when you're pressed up against a tight deadline? Doesn't very slow reading actually make you a lesser lawyer in some ways? Isn't it one of the foundational lawyering skills - being able to read and comprehend difficult material in a fairly quick time frame. I'm curious about your thoughts on this?

Now I'll agree that a 4 hour issue spotter isn't the best type of exam. Maybe it makes more sense to just give everyone 8 hours, or a full day.

Lol at bolded. First, a disclosure: I am ADHD (but did not take accommodations aside from just a quiet room).
As to the substance, you almost never read in practice like you did in law school. You don't read every case your research picks up, in its entirety. You skim, focus, find something you want/like, check the facts, and also make sure the case doesn't fuck you in some other way. Also, the situations where you have compressed time frame in such a way that working at non-adhd speed gets the job done and adhd speed doesn't just doesn't exist. And as for taking more time generally, I know when I get sucked into an ADHD hole, and I discount my time accordingly. Also, you become more certain of your ability to do things, and develop compensating techniques that lets you become as efficient as the next person. So, while having ADHD in practice may make you slower in the beginning, when you are learning how to do well at your job, it's also when they expect everyone to be slow and suck. This is the complete opposite in law school, where the first 8-10 times you are asked to perform the task, your career depends on it. Maybe you develop a exam writing style by 3L year or 2L year that would have you as fast as other are during 1L... but a little too late then, don't you think?

Also, I've seen this complaint a lot about extra time being disproportionate to need. But, in three years of sitting in an exam room with people that were getting extra time, I never saw them on law review. So, before everyone is up in arms about how much of an advantage it is, maybe also question the assumption that having the extra time puts a disproportionate amount of people in law review. (As another disclosure, while I could tell who in the group was given extra time--in that they didn't finish when I did--I did not know the basis for any other person's accommodation. But, I think it is a fair assumption that at least some of them were for ADHD.)

User avatar
georgej
Posts: 2373
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 12:55 am

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby georgej » Mon Apr 27, 2015 4:37 pm

MistakenGenius wrote:
georgej wrote:I'm gonna go on record saying nobody should get extra time on exams ever, but people should get more or less adderall depending on the severity of their condition. Seems fair to me. I think giving ADD peeps extra time marginalizes those with other mental problems who don't get the same considerations. If, like, a depressive is bummed as fuck during the exam he's hardly going to be able to write anything, but we don't let him postpone it until he feels better, we just let him take some meds or whatever and hope for the best.

I'm gonna go on record saying you're a dumb-ass and should go fuck yourself. You're some pampered little kid who doesn't realize how bad some people have it. One of my friends is at HLS and she is blind. Can you even comprehend how difficult it would be to do an exam in braille? And you'd deny her extra time. For every person that may or may not fake ADHD to get extended time, there are others who genuinely need extra time. It would be wrong of a school to try to make distinctions between students, all with doctor's recommendations.


Lol blindness is quite a bit different isn't it? Don't you think that's more serious than having ADD given that no medication can do anything to help make her see?

And I didn't say a school should try to make distinctions between real and fake cases, I said they should apply a blanket policy. I like that alphasteve got a quiet room - that seems like a much more reasonable accommodation.

User avatar
PourMeTea
Posts: 6508
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:32 am

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby PourMeTea » Mon Apr 27, 2015 4:43 pm

george you monster

User avatar
alphasteve
Posts: 16279
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby alphasteve » Mon Apr 27, 2015 4:49 pm

georgej wrote:
And I didn't say a school should try to make distinctions between real and fake cases, I said they should apply a blanket policy. I like that alphasteve got a quiet room - that seems like a much more reasonable accommodation.

To be fair, my ADHD is different than others. I have some forms of impulsivity, but I am primarily inattentive. So, I didn't think I needed it. Also, and this is entirely unique to me and should not be used against someone who elects extra time, but I wanted to be able to feel like I earned my grades like my friends. Frankly, in retrospect, I'd argue it was probably a bit reckless. I didn't know what law school exams were like, and I got lucky they were in my wheelhouse. If I were advising someone in my position as they started law school, I would absolutely tell them to request time accommodations to see whether they were needed. I would expect them to be honest with themselves, though, about what is "needed." If you completely finish your exam with an hour left of time after working your ass off, you shouldn't spend the hour scouring and revising.

User avatar
anyriotgirl
Posts: 7530
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 11:54 am

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby anyriotgirl » Mon Apr 27, 2015 4:53 pm

twenty wrote:
PourMeTea wrote:I have heard that a pretty prominent professor is changing their exam for next year from a horserace. Not because of extra-time faker douchebags per se, but because someone who happened to get extra time on a horserace that also knew nothing about the subject had an extra hour and a half to outline dump despite making terrible arguments and ended up with one of the highest grades in the class by virtue of having more words on a page. Maybe that will catch on.


To be fair, this seems to be a failing of race horse exams in general. I spoke to one professor after the exam who was almost openly hostile - something to the effect of "your arguments were actually spectacularly terrible; congratulations on typing spectacularly terrible arguments significantly faster than your peers." Of course, using a non-race horse exam for something like torts seems like an equally bad idea. Oh, look, everyone knows how negligence works. Fantastic. Now the curve turns on miniscule counterarguments and how much you can cram into a word-limited essay.

The fact that having extra time is such a big deal should be an indicator of a broken pedagogical system. Yeah, it sucks that people manage to get fake diagnostics for things they don't really have, but the reason they weren't doing this in college was because either 1) they weren't aware enough of the benefit, or 2) that the benefit was significantly smaller back then.


professors of mine have made comments about penalizing people for doing outline dumps, but I don't know if they're really telling the truth

User avatar
rpupkin
Posts: 3864
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby rpupkin » Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:00 pm

PourMeTea wrote:I have heard that a pretty prominent professor is changing their exam for next year from a horserace. Not because of extra-time faker douchebags per se, but because someone who happened to get extra time on a horserace that also knew nothing about the subject had an extra hour and a half to outline dump despite making terrible arguments and ended up with one of the highest grades in the class by virtue of having more words on a page.
This is depressing on many levels. Prominent Prof: "I received an exam that made terrible arguments and was nothing more than the regurgitation of an outline. But I had to assign the student one of the highest grades in the class because there were lots of words. My hands were tied!"

User avatar
Desert Fox
Progressively loosing literacy
Posts: 14444
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby Desert Fox » Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:03 pm

Racehorse is a remarkably stupid way of testing people in the first place. Not just the time-limit, but testing almost purely on just making an argument rather than quality. It's a retarded way to turn a subjective test into a faux-objective one. But it still isn't really objective. I took a few tests that were meant to be done in three hours but you got 8. Those are much more fair. You can give the mush brains 24 hours if you want.

But if time is of the essence then an arbitrary extension of time ruins the test. What if the person needs 2X instead of 1.5? What if they only need 1.25X but got 1.5X. It's not like doctors are making an accurate guess. It's crazy.

Schools should either require that time isn't of the essence during exams or grade the mush brains totally off curve on the basis of their tests. The former is preferable IMO.

User avatar
georgej
Posts: 2373
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 12:55 am

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby georgej » Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:04 pm

alphasteve wrote:
georgej wrote:
And I didn't say a school should try to make distinctions between real and fake cases, I said they should apply a blanket policy. I like that alphasteve got a quiet room - that seems like a much more reasonable accommodation.

To be fair, my ADHD is different than others. I have some forms of impulsivity, but I am primarily inattentive. So, I didn't think I needed it. Also, and this is entirely unique to me and should not be used against someone who elects extra time, but I wanted to be able to feel like I earned my grades like my friends. Frankly, in retrospect, I'd argue it was probably a bit reckless. I didn't know what law school exams were like, and I got lucky they were in my wheelhouse. If I were advising someone in my position as they started law school, I would absolutely tell them to request time accommodations to see whether they were needed. I would expect them to be honest with themselves, though, about what is "needed." If you completely finish your exam with an hour left of time after working your ass off, you shouldn't spend the hour scouring and revising.


Ya that's reasonable advice to give someone given that extra time is on the table, I mean why not take it? But to expect someone who still has an hour left not to edit what they have and try to maximize points is also kind of unrealistic. I, by the grace of God, usually finish exams really fast, so I have time to edit and go back and add stuff I didn't think of right away or incorporate fully in my first pass.

And I'm not meaning to single you out, it probably sucks to have adhd, but it doesn't seem to have held you back any. What really sucks is for people who can't pull it off the way you can, and if they aren't given extra time it would suck more. The trade-off is people who aren't adhd but maybe have testing problems for some other reason that doesn't get extra time get a less sucky go of it.

My point is basically that on balance I think fewer people get disadvantaged in a system that only gives extra time for physical impairments (like blindness or stuff that keeps you from being able to type fast). Psychological stuff is a) too easy to fake and b) too hard to define w/r/t how much accommodation it should accord.

User avatar
georgej
Posts: 2373
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 12:55 am

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby georgej » Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:06 pm

Desert Fox wrote:Racehorse is a remarkably stupid way of testing people in the first place. Not just the time-limit, but testing almost purely on just making an argument rather than quality. It's a retarded way to turn a subjective test into a faux-objective one. But it still isn't really objective. I took a few tests that were meant to be done in three hours but you got 8. Those are much more fair. You can give the mush brains 24 hours if you want.

But if time is of the essence then an arbitrary extension of time ruins the test. What if the person needs 2X instead of 1.5? What if they only need 1.25X but got 1.5X. It's not like doctors are making an accurate guess. It's crazy.

Schools should either require that time isn't of the essence during exams or grade the mush brains totally off curve on the basis of their tests. The former is preferable IMO.


Hear, hear

User avatar
chuckbass
Posts: 9957
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:29 pm

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby chuckbass » Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:51 pm

PourMeTea wrote:george you monster

User avatar
alphasteve
Posts: 16279
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby alphasteve » Mon Apr 27, 2015 6:21 pm

georgej wrote:And I'm not meaning to single you out, it probably sucks to have adhd, but it doesn't seem to have held you back any. What really sucks is for people who can't pull it off the way you can, and if they aren't given extra time it would suck more. The trade-off is people who aren't adhd but maybe have testing problems for some other reason that doesn't get extra time get a less sucky go of it.

My point is basically that on balance I think fewer people get disadvantaged in a system that only gives extra time for physical impairments (like blindness or stuff that keeps you from being able to type fast). Psychological stuff is a) too easy to fake and b) too hard to define w/r/t how much accommodation it should accord.

I think the requirement for additional time for law school exams should be the same requirements for SAT, LSAT, Bar, etc. That's a shit ton higher than what I think it currently is. And having a history of requiring accommodations should also be a requirement (at the UG level). That would probably weed out many of the "GP diagnosed me with ADHD, but maybe it isn't really" crowd to the point that you move the problem OP complains of from the real to the merely hypothetical.

User avatar
minnbills
Posts: 3153
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby minnbills » Mon Apr 27, 2015 6:46 pm

There was a guy at my school who faked a broken arm to get more time. A friend of mine saw him take the sling off and type like hell during the exam (they were in the extra-time room together).

Dude's at the one of the biggest firms in my market now.

User avatar
rpupkin
Posts: 3864
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby rpupkin » Mon Apr 27, 2015 6:52 pm

minnbills wrote:There was a guy at my school who faked a broken arm to get more time. A friend of mine saw him take the sling off and type like hell during the exam (they were in the extra-time room together).

Dude's at the one of the biggest firms in my market now.

One the one hand, that's appalling. On the other hand, I think I respect that guy more than someone who feigns an inability to concentrate in order to obtain a prescription for powerful amphetamines.

Nomo
Posts: 700
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2014 2:06 am

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby Nomo » Mon Apr 27, 2015 7:21 pm

alphasteve wrote:
Nomo wrote:
Does there come a time when it just doesn't make sense to level the playing field anymore? I mean, if you read that slowly are you going to charge your client for it? What do you do when you're pressed up against a tight deadline? Doesn't very slow reading actually make you a lesser lawyer in some ways? Isn't it one of the foundational lawyering skills - being able to read and comprehend difficult material in a fairly quick time frame. I'm curious about your thoughts on this?

Now I'll agree that a 4 hour issue spotter isn't the best type of exam. Maybe it makes more sense to just give everyone 8 hours, or a full day.

Lol at bolded. First, a disclosure: I am ADHD (but did not take accommodations aside from just a quiet room).
As to the substance, you almost never read in practice like you did in law school. You don't read every case your research picks up, in its entirety. You skim, focus, find something you want/like, check the facts, and also make sure the case doesn't fuck you in some other way. Also, the situations where you have compressed time frame in such a way that working at non-adhd speed gets the job done and adhd speed doesn't just doesn't exist. And as for taking more time generally, I know when I get sucked into an ADHD hole, and I discount my time accordingly. Also, you become more certain of your ability to do things, and develop compensating techniques that lets you become as efficient as the next person. So, while having ADHD in practice may make you slower in the beginning, when you are learning how to do well at your job, it's also when they expect everyone to be slow and suck. This is the complete opposite in law school, where the first 8-10 times you are asked to perform the task, your career depends on it. Maybe you develop a exam writing style by 3L year or 2L year that would have you as fast as other are during 1L... but a little too late then, don't you think?

Also, I've seen this complaint a lot about extra time being disproportionate to need. But, in three years of sitting in an exam room with people that were getting extra time, I never saw them on law review. So, before everyone is up in arms about how much of an advantage it is, maybe also question the assumption that having the extra time puts a disproportionate amount of people in law review. (As another disclosure, while I could tell who in the group was given extra time--in that they didn't finish when I did--I did not know the basis for any other person's accommodation. But, I think it is a fair assumption that at least some of them were for ADHD.)


So are those who read slowly due to ADHD able to skim at normal speed?

Also, why exactly (from the perspective of someone with ADHD) are the time-crunch activities in practice different from the time-crunched activities on exams? I'm a practicing attorney and I think they're relatively similar. Especially for things that come up during trial. Its pretty common that an evidentiary issue comes up mid-trial, one side says that cases A and B support my position, and the judge says OK - everyone can have 20 minutes to read the cases and then we'll come back for a quick argument, I'll make a decision, and trial will continue.

User avatar
alphasteve
Posts: 16279
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby alphasteve » Mon Apr 27, 2015 7:40 pm

Nomo wrote:
So are those who read slowly due to ADHD able to skim at normal speed?

Also, why exactly (from the perspective of someone with ADHD) are the time-crunch activities in practice different from the time-crunched activities on exams? I'm a practicing attorney and I think they're relatively similar. Especially for things that come up during trial. Its pretty common that an evidentiary issue comes up mid-trial, one side says that cases A and B support my position, and the judge says OK - everyone can have 20 minutes to read the cases and then we'll come back for a quick argument, I'll make a decision, and trial will continue.


I'm surprised you say you find the two activities similar. We must have very different practices. Also, I don't think you understand ADHD very well. You don't read more slowly because you have ADHD. You can read just as fast as anyone (or better put, you can read as fast as you could if you didn't have ADHD), but when you stretch that task out over a longer period of time (e.g. longer than 20 minutes), distract-ability comes into play. Thus, you finish that reading later than everyone else. That's why skimming and fully reading are different. It's easier to pay attention when you skim.

As to why I think the activities are different - I don't know your practice, obviously, so I simply lack a frame of reference for how they could be similar. For example, I've never had a law school exam where I had to read a case and pick out where I think it's wrong or how I can distinguish it in 20 minutes. I mean... do you give yourself three hours to write any brief and file it as soon as you are done or 3 hours hits, no matter what? I'd suggest you probably start early, especially if its a topic where you will have to research, and give yourself time if needed. The only thing that is similar to practice is legal writing (assuming you at least get some sort of nominal grade), and surprise - that's not timed in the same way, though everyone, including those with ADHD, have the exact same amount of time to accomplish it.

User avatar
Ohiobumpkin
Posts: 465
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:50 am

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby Ohiobumpkin » Mon Apr 27, 2015 8:07 pm

justkeepswimming794 wrote:
Fiero85 wrote:
JohannDeMann wrote:my friend in law school got time and a half. having adhd is such a curse in a law school setting you could give them 10 hours on a 3 hour exam and it wouldnt matter. most of the problem with adhd is overanalyzing everything and overtyping, which really isnt helped by even more time.
chill and focus on yourself, you're fine.


I agree having ADHD would have a significant hampering effect. I'm addressing strategic liars who do this to get ahead. Part of the contingent of students angry about this are people who legit have anxiety/ADHD and are being lumped in with the fakers who abuse a policy meant for them (the real people).

And I'm chill IRL, this isn't all about me or a personal vendetta of some kind. Just another BS thing about law school to discuss.


Nothing wrong with venting about law school BS.

As someone who was diagnosed with learning disabilities at a very young age, this sort of thing is really a shame. The entire point in exam accommodations is to level the playing field. Some people are very slow readers due to a learning disability (I'm talking at least 4x times as slow as their peers) but once they absorb the fact pattern they have no trouble at all issue spotting/formulating their answers with sophisticated analysis whatsoever. These people have known of their disability (at the LATEST) since the beginning of college. To be fair, it can be fairly easy to compensate with a learning disability - if you have otherwise high intelligence - during middle school and high school (depending on the school).

The point is that this really sucks for the people who actually need these accommodations, because someone who was already top of their class - chances are - doesnt need extended time on an exam. Clearly they are getting by just fine. People that abuse the system like this are undermining the entire point in accommodating those with actual need.

Silver lining: I DO think there is something to say about these sort of maneuvers in general. You can only cheat your way through the system for so long. Perhaps karma will work it out for these sort of people abusing the system when they're in a big law job that they actually cannot handle, and there are no more short-cuts that they can take to get ahead.


+1

Nomo
Posts: 700
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2014 2:06 am

Re: A Most Sincere Middle Finger to Fake ADHD Law Students

Postby Nomo » Tue Apr 28, 2015 6:14 pm

alphasteve wrote:
Nomo wrote:
So are those who read slowly due to ADHD able to skim at normal speed?

Also, why exactly (from the perspective of someone with ADHD) are the time-crunch activities in practice different from the time-crunched activities on exams? I'm a practicing attorney and I think they're relatively similar. Especially for things that come up during trial. Its pretty common that an evidentiary issue comes up mid-trial, one side says that cases A and B support my position, and the judge says OK - everyone can have 20 minutes to read the cases and then we'll come back for a quick argument, I'll make a decision, and trial will continue.


I'm surprised you say you find the two activities similar. We must have very different practices. Also, I don't think you understand ADHD very well. You don't read more slowly because you have ADHD. You can read just as fast as anyone (or better put, you can read as fast as you could if you didn't have ADHD), but when you stretch that task out over a longer period of time (e.g. longer than 20 minutes), distract-ability comes into play. Thus, you finish that reading later than everyone else. That's why skimming and fully reading are different. It's easier to pay attention when you skim.

As to why I think the activities are different - I don't know your practice, obviously, so I simply lack a frame of reference for how they could be similar. For example, I've never had a law school exam where I had to read a case and pick out where I think it's wrong or how I can distinguish it in 20 minutes. I mean... do you give yourself three hours to write any brief and file it as soon as you are done or 3 hours hits, no matter what? I'd suggest you probably start early, especially if its a topic where you will have to research, and give yourself time if needed. The only thing that is similar to practice is legal writing (assuming you at least get some sort of nominal grade), and surprise - that's not timed in the same way, though everyone, including those with ADHD, have the exact same amount of time to accomplish it.


I don't know much about ADHD. These are genuine questions.

I think the difference might e more in our law school exams than our practice experience. I had plenty of exams where there were 8 or 9 short fact patterns and you were given the role of arguing for a particular result. You don't actually read cases on the exam, but you do quickly review the facts, think up an argument, and then write it down. All in the span of 20 minutes. Would someone with ADHD find it easier to do this sort of exam?

(Maybe half of my exams consisted of just one or two fact patterns where you were supposed to identify a ton of issues).




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: deadthrone7, electriklemon, MSNbot Media, newhere21, TheSpanishMain and 12 guests