SBA Blog

Honor Council
Pavan Parikh
Kathy Young
Alex Thomas
Thomas Harvey
Andrew Wold
David Morin
Kim Cotsworth
Jen Beasley
Lauren Dyer
Luis Hess
Michael Holman

2L REP
Eric Erdman
Erin Brooks
Phil Eckelkamp
Mark Milton
Chris Lee
Brian Flynn
Karla Baumler

3L REP
Lisa Adams
Stessie Bill
Erin Doyle
Laura Keck
Sara Reeb
Ruthie Russell
AJ Shultz

SGA Reps
Emily Kiser
Tyson Mutrux

Part-Time Reps
Stacy Connelly
Jennifer Blues
Bret Heger

SBA meetings and Dean’s forums are only an hour long usually. That’s not a lot of time to state your concerns or get answers. So here is a list of a few things brought up every meeting that we have found solutions to.

1. LIBRARY HOURS: I just want to highlight this because people don’t seem to realize it. Last semester the library closed at 5 on Friday and Saturday. This semester those have been extended to 9. Just so you know, your SBA did that.

2. KICKING UNDERGRADUATES OUT OF THE LIBRARY: This we can’t do. Plain and simple. At least not as a general decree. The library is a public repository, it has to be open to EVERYONE. At the worst it’s against the law, at the best I think we get yelled at by somebody. So solutions for this?

A. During exam times there will be many specific tables reserved just for us and you have the authority to ask undergraduates to move.

B. If the undergraduates are being loud then just kick them out yourself. I mean we’re all going into a profession where we have to be assertive. As adults we can ask the undergraduates to leave I’m sure.

C. There’s talk of a sticker system being implemented, but it probably won’t be until next year. This way only law people can check out study room keys and the like.

3. SMOKING: We put up a sign outside the lower entrance, plain and simple. I don’t like breathing smoke 24/7. No one does. But it’s a free country and people have the right to pour tobacco into their lungs if they want to (especially outside). But the sign has been working. People are no longer smoking near the doors. Can this please never be brought up again?

Above all, do not approve the smoking ban! Sounds like a good idea on paper. But people don’t read the fine print. The part where people can only smoke in abandoned areas like parking lots and across the dark street. So signing the smoking ban right now is like forcing people to get mugged.

4. SELF-SCHEDULING: I believe it’s important, I believe that it’s needed, I believe that it should be implemented. But it’s not going to get done this year, plain and simple. It probably sucks, and I can’t imagine how difficult it must be. But it’s just not going to happen. And honestly having the same conversation just sucks up time.

5. FREE PRINTING: It was free last semester, it’s not going to be free again. Next year I’m going to crusade hard if we don’t get the 50 free prints off of printing cards, but totally free printing will most likely never happen again. I do agree the printing is too expensive, but that’s a separate point. Printing will never be free, at least not while the current deans are here. And since it’s their money, it’s their choice. And they’ve been pretty adamant about not giving it to us for free.

My main point. People said that they voted for the honor code last year because they were promised they’d get self-scheduled exams. But you didn’t give up anything by voting for the honor code. What would you rather do? Go up in front of the deans and have another faculty member accusing you while you have to defend yourself? Who do you think the deans are going to believe? At least here you have a formalized trial, with another student defending you and you’re being heard by a council of your peers. I would have voted for it even without the self-scheduled exams myself. If you want to know the difference between the two I’m sure a copy of the old procedural rules is available.

Just some things right now. But I went to every single SBA meeting and dean’s forum this year and the number of times I tuned out was amazing. The same arguments and the same circles round and round. I’m not the smartest person in this law school. Not by a long shot. So I have a hard time believing that people can’t come up with solutions instead of rapid, repetitive, and redundant complaints. So these things have been solved, and hopefully they won’t be brought up again.

Let’s be honest to begin with, the elections are pretty big popularity contests. Also, most people don’t care about the elections except for the people running. And not many people want to read a big long platform. So I’ll try to summarize

I was very involved with the SBA this year. I helped organize socials with both Vice-Presidents, harped on the school to fix the squeaky chairs, went to the dean’s forums, and so on. That’s not the important part.

There are some things on the SBA we can’t fix. We can put pressure on the Deans to keep the faculty but we can’t do that without you guys. That’s what the SBA is about for me. My policy is to get the students more involved in the SBA.

This is your only voice guys. If you have a problem with faculty retention, a drop in the rankings, the upcoming smoking ban, and scheduling problems you guys need to act.

So why elect me? Because if you bring me a problem I’ll spearhead it. I’ll bring it to the Deans and to the SBA and get the news out. I just can’t change things myself. Most importantly I want people to come to me with issues no matter how inconsequential they might seem.

I want to organize killer socials next year, but more importantly I want to foster communication between the deans, the SBA, and the students.

So the two reasons you should elect me:

1. I was on SBA this year. I know what problems have been fixed, which ones can be fixed and which ones can’t. I think consistency is important. New problems will get solved and old ones won’t come back to haunt us. It’s great that people want to reform the honor code, but they need to know what is being proposed for reform.
2. People don’t care about the SBA because the reps don’t get the word out a lot of the time. Everyone I’m running against is a great person. But please vote based on who you think is going to volunteer and get the job done. If no one volunteers or puts themselves out there, nothing gets done.

     Deans Underwood and Parvis gave us an update on the Dean’s forum today.  The concentrations are going to be included in the hooding booklet.  We owe many thanks to Dean Parvis and I think Falisha McCaster for their time and work.  The administration has been working with the law library on a new policy that would announce that law students had priority in the library from April 29-May 14 for finals.  Further, there are plans for an “activity hour” from 6:00-6:50 for the night students during which there could be a variety of programs such as Dean’s forums, Career Services meetings, etc.  Self-scheduled exams were added to the agenda for the upcoming faculty meeting in an attempt to come into compliance by Fall 2008.  Unfortunately, that meeting won’t take place until May so we may not know very much in the near future.  Finally, Dean Underwood suggested a “State of the Law School” speech for next year in which Dean Lewis would address student concerns and general progress at the law school.

     I think this is great feedback and shows how far the Dean’s Forum went towards raising concerns and bringing them to the administration’s attention.  I also get the impression that Deans Underwood and Parvis really took what we said at the forum seriously.  Their responses and suggestions showed that and I think that is fantastic.  However, I think that Dean Underwood’s proposed  “State of the Law School” speech runs the risk of missing the mark without certain provisions.  

     Dean Underwood suggested the address because of her sense that law students wanted a more formal address from the Dean on specific issues.  Is that really what we want?  It isn’t what I wanted from the Dean’s forum. 

     I had the impression that the Dean had a formal response prepared for the rankings issue as well as the professor retention issue.  By formal I don’t mean that he had something written out or that he had anticipated our exact questions.  No, my sense was that this was not the first time he had addressed these issues, formally or informally.  The man does this for a living.  I imagine we aren’t the first law students or alumni to ever ask about rankings and faculty retention.  In any case, I think that what we got yesterday is pretty much what we would get from a more formal address on those issues. 

     What I wanted from the Dean, what I still want from the Dean and what I think most of us want is for him to tell us something along the lines of the following:  1) The precipitous drop in the rankings is a major problem. 2) However, even though we dropped in the rankings, that doesn’t change anything about the quality of the education you are getting here. 3) Finally, here is my (fill in the blank) step plan to address the issue.

     Is that too much to ask for?  I hope not.  I assume that there is a plan to increase the school’s reputation and ranking.  I wouldn’t think that the dean would need a formal address or time to prepare a presentation on the matter.  I would think that he would know it by heart because he cares about the school’s reputation as much as we do. 

     However, we didn’t hear about his plan.  Instead, what we mostly heard was an attack on the rankings.  It’s an entirely valid point that the rankings are flawed.  Nonetheless, I was disappointed with the attack on the rankings system because I already knew they were problematic when I walked in the room.  I was disappointed in the response to my question about faculty retention because I already knew St. Louis is a tough sell to those who aren’t from here.  I know that good professors want to leave for higher ranked schools.  I knew that before I ever set foot in the room.

     I also know that some schools in midwestern cities and towns hire and retain high quality faculty.  Maybe those schools have lower teaching loads.  Maybe they do a better job of supporting and encouraging faculty research than we do.  Or, maybe they just pay them more.  

     I do know this, tenured or tenure track professors don’t leave one university job for another because the new one is just marginally better.  That is way too risky.  We may think that professors are liberal but if you ask them about their career, their family and their money, they are conservative like everyone else. 

    What I didn’t know when I left the Dean’s Forum and what I still don’t know is what the school is doing to address these problems.  If the Dean were to seriously address those issues, I think it would go a long way. 

     Treat us like the smart and competent adults we are.  We knew when we applied here that SLU was not a top 20 law school.  We came anyway for a variety of reasons. Some of us are from here or want to practice here.  Some of us got a great scholarship.  Some of us couldn’t get in elsewhere. 

     Most importantly, we aren’t leaving now.  It is too late.  We’ve spent too much time and done too much work.  We’ve made friends with students and faculty.  We are invested and committed and have every reason to want to see the law school do well, even if it is completely self-interested. 

     In the end, I think Dean Underwood’s suggestion of a “state of the law school” address is a good one, but it won’t help at all if it doesn’t include honest and serious answers to the interrelated questions of how we improve the rankings and retain the faculty.

First Annual SBA

Students v. Faculty/Staff Volleyball Tournament

Have you ever wanted to spike a ball at a classmate or a prof? 

Have you ever wanted to scream or growl during class?

NOW IS YOUR CHANCE.  LET IT ALL OUT!!!

• Friday April 18, 2008 3pm
• Simon Recreation Center
• Go to the SBA office and get your sign-up sheet and rule packet TODAY!
• Team sign-up due Wednesday April 16 8pm- slide under the SBA door.
• For individual sign-up, contact Lauren or Eric at the addresses listed below.

Snacks and Beverages provided.  No entry fee.

Contact Lauren Bissell at lbissell@slu.edu or Eric Erdman at e.erdman@gmail.com for more information.

Rankings. Rankings. Rankings. It’s definitely been the buzz of the school as of late. A larger-than-normal crowd attended the Deans’ Forum out of concern with these new rankings. Many people wanted answers for why we’ve consistently dropped in the rankings the last 3-4 years, and others wanted to know what we were doing to ensure that this trend doesn’t continue. If you look at Thomas Harvey’s play-by-play of the Forum, you can see that the rankings issue was raised at multiple points, and Dean Lewis had several stances on the rankings and what they mean for SLU.

I merely want to address one specific comment made by Dean Lewis that caught my attention: the idea that our Midwestern location and lack of successful football team could have an impact on our law school ranking.

In NCAA sports, you often hear about “East/West Coast Bias” and how Midwestern college sports teams are at a disadvantage in the national rankings and in notoriety. Whether or not those biases actually exist in sports, I’d certainly never heard about such a bias in “academic” rankings until the Deans’ Forum. In response to Dean Lewis’ comments, below is a list of “Midwestern” schools that currently rank higher than SLU in the US News rankings. To avoid debate about whether certain schools are “truly Midwest,” I left Texas schools (4 schools ahead of us), Chicago schools (4 schools ahead of us), and “Northern Great Lakes” schools (4 schools ahead of us) out of the list. I’m sure I’ve left out other schools that could be given the “Midwest” designation or are within one day’s drive of our campus, but I think this list will do for now:

Wash U. – 19 (Div. 3 football)
Notre Dame - 22
Illinois – 27
Iowa – 27
Indiana – 36
Cincinnati – 52
Kentucky – 59
Missouri – 59
IU-Indy – 68 (No football)
Oklahoma – 68
KU – 73
Nebraska – 73
Denver – 88 (No football)

Based on this list, I’m not sure that I see a major “bias” here. I see at least 13 schools in the Midwest/Big XII area that rank higher than us, and I see multiple “weak or nonexistent in football” schools ahead of us. To be sure, I’m not using this post to defend the rankings or to assert that all of Dean Lewis’ assertions are completely off-base. I’m merely stating that we shouldn’t be using “East/West Coast Bias” and “Football Bias” as excuses for our poor showing in a major publication’s rankings. We need to be looking at the substantive school issues creating our rankings drop. Wash U, Missouri, Kansas, U of I, and many other nearby schools face any potential biases that we do. This begs the question, what are they doing that we aren’t?

We will have our next SBA meeting Thursday April 9 at 5:00 in Room 02.  I strongly encourage all students to come.  The strong showing at the Dean’s Forum yesterday really inspired me that we can make some changes at the University!  If nothing else, come for the free food…especially all of my fellow Trial Ad classmates and other students who have evening classes tomorrow! 

ERIN BROOKS
Hi everyone! I am excited to run to serve as one of your 2L SBA representatives for this upcoming school year.

I served as a 1L rep this year and enjoyed every minute. From planning (and attending!) fun events that SBA sponsored, to helping change the policies of our school by interacting with our administration, I enjoyed each new opportunity and challenge. I also served as merchandise co-chairman by organizing the great-looking SLU Law gear you see around school (on sale in the SBA Office!). Being involved in these ways allowed me to meet many people, giving me greater perspective on issues we face at school.

As we move into our second year where we will have new classes with new faces, I think it is important to elect representatives who are outgoing, inclusive, and committed to representing the changing needs we have as law students. It’s my sincere hope that you will re-elect me this upcoming year. I have the energy and dedication to make sure we, as students, continue to have a voice.

Best,
Erin Brooks

DENNIS FRICKS

There are two major concerns I have that, if elected, will be a focus of mine as an SBA Representative.

I am a bit frustrated, like all of us, by the US New and World Report rankings that were recently published. At the Dean’s Forum, it was argued that the rankings were flawed and arbitrary. I agree with this assertion, but these rankings can have a real impact on the value of our degree. I understand that the rankings are a bit like a game, but it’s time for SLU to play the game and try to take some alternate steps to improving this rank. I do not want to keep paying for a tier two school while attending a tier three school. I’m not claiming to have the power to produce any great changes, but at the very least, I will use this position, if elected, to try to hold the administration to a higher level of accountability.

My other great frustration is with the class selection process at our school. With complete unanimity, professors with whom I have talked have told me to take the classes that interest me and the professors who challenge me—and to essentially ignore the administration’s attempt to funnel us into “bar requirement” classes. I have also been told that passing the bar is directly related to how much we specifically study for the bar after graduation, not the specific classes we take. My question is: why does the administration seem to be ignoring the advice of their faculty? I am in graduate school, but I feel as if I have less power to decide my schedule than I did when I was in middle school as the biggest decision I currently seem to have is if I want to take Business Associations at 8:00 or 10:00. If elected, I will also use this position to question the current enrollment focus.
I am always open to suggestions and enjoy listening to any other student concerns. Rather than just complain, let’s actually do something to make our school great.
Thank you for taking the time to read, and I appreciate your support.

Enjoy the picture of me running in the black and white hoops of my Highgate Harriers running club.

KARLA BAUMLER

Hi! My name is Karla Baumler and I am running to be a 2L Rep on SBA next year. I am currently on SBA as a 1L PT Rep. As a Rep this past year, I was on the Barrister’s Committee, particularly helping to find a band which fell within our budget. This past year I also voiced my accelerated part-time class’s concerns with our summer schedule to the administration and our section has multiple summer options to choose from.

I want to be a 2L Rep next year because I want to continue working with the students and voicing concerns to the administration to make SLU Law live up to its potential. In particular next year I want to look at the Limited Enrollment Registration Process to see how it can be improved. I know I was very frustrated with the process this spring! I heard of students getting put in limited classes they didn’t sign up for, while other students didn’t get into their 1st priority (and both students sent their form in about the same time.) I would like to work with the administration to see if there is a better method that can be used so that limited enrollment runs smoother and is more fair so that students have an equal opportunity to get into the smaller classes. I would appreciate the opportunity to serve as a 2L Class as a SBA Rep.
Thanks!
~Karla Baumler

I have a problem: when people speak with empty words, I can’t listen.

Political jabberwocky, TV punditry, corporate missives: unite in aggrandized futility! As Dilbert has loyal readership for a reason, and IBM currently airs a commercial with company employees playing bingo to the CEO’s meaningless catchphrasing, so now we know the talking points, the how-to, for addressing rankings. Attention, Deans from Mercer on down: are you taking notes?

Honestly, Thomas Harvey’s comprehensive rundown of the Dean’s Forum was most helpful because I walked out of 04 with hardly a clue as to what was said. I felt as one does after eating Krispy Kremes for lunch. Now, I had circled this meeting on the calendar if for no other reason but its potentially lurid value. Perhaps, if I were lucky, it would deliver better than the La Hoya-Mayweather bout. How timely the Dean’s Forum was, at least in relation to you-know-who’s little annual school pageantry.

Upon release of the rankings last week, I suspect the administration reacted with equal dismay as its students, if not more so – but if they did, the sentiment was today tucked beneath a façade of providence. Yes, the students came with a bone to pick, and in numbers obviously signaling this fact (an inescapable numeric contrast to the last Dean’s Forum). But the Dean seemed to throw no bones, only chew toys.

For example: an allusion to geography, and how some professors simply prefer one coast or another. He might have instead considered saying “[cough Bloom cough]… what are you gonna do?” Such unambiguously ambiguous statements serve only to alert an audience that coyness is occurring elsewhere, as well.

Another example: schools falsify reporting. Fine. But what do we DO about it? — If the credo holds, as reiterated throughout this meeting, that the Rankings are all sales and no accuracy, and we don’t care about them – then, uh, let’s falsify too. Well, not really, but - what’s the difference? Who can know? We know what Dean Lewis tells us, and what US News tells us. And we know that perception defines reality. We don’t like how we’re perceived right now.

I know what sort of answer I was looking for from the Dean. Ownership (of any sort). Acknowledgement that something happened. Maybe a clue as to what’s behind the wizard’s curtain. What does everyone else see, or what does he know, that we do not? To hear him speak, one would think nothing happened. To my mind, the meeting came across as a something of a denial.

Of course, the question must be asked:
What was Dean Lewis to do? Even an idle confession – a real tidbit of substantive information – bears significant chance of repeat. Such an admission of negative ongoings in the school might find its way out Morrissey’s doors. When from the Dean’s mouth, that’s not good.

But we still see it: there’s a fairly visible exodus of faculty (this topic was broached, and the answer mostly focused on lateral hires). There’s something going on with salary, with tenure policies, with . . . something. Dimly, I suspect some simple acknowledgement could have dampened the fear and aggression in the room. We don’t need to know everything, but we’d sure like to know something.

When I left, I still felt befuddled equally about the mysterious machinations of US News and World Report, and how the school actually perceives it, behind its closed doors. And so we, the impotent students, continue to speculate and gripe. I wish it were otherwise. Does the Dean?