Exam Grade Change
Posted: Wed Jan 19, 2011 12:30 am
Does anyone have experience getting their grade changed on their exam because their professor took off for something that is technically correct, but taught differently in class?
Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=144957
Rule number 1: if your professor teaches something that conflicts with a hornbook, your professor's interpretation is the one you use.nylaw23 wrote:Does anyone have experience getting their grade changed on their exam because their professor took off for something that is technically correct, but taught differently in class?
Won't happen, but you could try.nylaw23 wrote:Does anyone have experience getting their grade changed on their exam because their professor took off for something that is technically correct, but taught differently in class?
TITCRmistergoft wrote:Rule number 1: if your professor teaches something that conflicts with a hornbook, your professor's interpretation is the one you use.nylaw23 wrote:Does anyone have experience getting their grade changed on their exam because their professor took off for something that is technically correct, but taught differently in class?
uwb09 wrote:TITCRmistergoft wrote:Rule number 1: if your professor teaches something that conflicts with a hornbook, your professor's interpretation is the one you use.nylaw23 wrote:Does anyone have experience getting their grade changed on their exam because their professor took off for something that is technically correct, but taught differently in class?
It seems like you don't want to hear this tidbit below, but it is 100% accurate, and you would be well suited to adjust to it! Approaching a professor with the term "technically correct" is a bit of an oxymoron for the study of law anyway. I really think this would be more than just an uphill battle.nylaw23 wrote:Figured this would be an uphill battle....
If anyone has any advice on how to approach the professor...
mistergoft wrote:Rule number 1: if your professor teaches something that conflicts with a hornbook, your professor's interpretation is the one you use.nylaw23 wrote:Does anyone have experience getting their grade changed on their exam because their professor took off for something that is technically correct, but taught differently in class?
nylaw23 wrote:Figured this would be an uphill battle....
If anyone has any advice on how to approach the professor...
+1mistergoft wrote:Rule number 1: if your professor teaches something that conflicts with a hornbook, your professor's interpretation is the one you use.nylaw23 wrote:Does anyone have experience getting their grade changed on their exam because their professor took off for something that is technically correct, but taught differently in class?
You're tested on what you are taught in class, not what you glean from your "independent research". Your professor will not adjust your grade because what you said was technically correct - that would put all of your classmates who recited the information taught at a disadvantage.nylaw23 wrote:The error is not egregious but from my independent research there has been a different interpretation of the law that we were tested on. I know you are thinking that I probably do not know what I am talking and my interpretation isn't right, but interesting what we were taught was the same thing from 20 years ago that does not incorporate an important Supreme Court decision interpreting an earlier decision that is the basis of the law we were taught. (what we were taught was the implications of the earlier decision)
Why argue this? Unless the case was directly on-point, it'll take years for the law to reshape. For example, look at the rapidly evolving doctrine surrounding the Confrontation clause. This is likely why the prof chose to teach the existing doctrine.nylaw23 wrote:The error is not egregious but from my independent research there has been a different interpretation of the law that we were tested on. I know you are thinking that I probably do not know what I am talking and my interpretation isn't right, but interesting what we were taught was the same thing from 20 years ago that does not incorporate an important Supreme Court decision interpreting an earlier decision that is the basis of the law we were taught. (what we were taught was the implications of the earlier decision)
nylaw23 wrote:The error is not egregious but from my independent research there has been a different interpretation of the law that we were tested on. I know you are thinking that I probably do not know what I am talking and my interpretation isn't right, but interesting what we were taught was the same thing from 20 years ago that does not incorporate an important Supreme Court decision interpreting an earlier decision that is the basis of the law we were taught. (what we were taught was the implications of the earlier decision)
This scenario is probably why so many professors say don't use outside supplements. I use them; they are quite helpful; but in the end your professor's take is the one that matters for the exam. The danger with supplements is remembering and using what was in the supplement over what was taught in class.nylaw23 wrote:Does anyone have experience getting their grade changed on their exam because their professor took off for something that is technically correct, but taught differently in class?
We have this policy as well.Desert Fox wrote:One the assistant deans told my class that grade changes for anything other than computational reasons were not allowed by rule.
My school also has this policy.flcath wrote:We have this policy as well.Desert Fox wrote:One the assistant deans told my class that grade changes for anything other than computational reasons were not allowed by rule.