No more.
Dan’s killing me. Look:
Part of a class reading assignment:
“However, in Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497, 499 (1954) (a companion case to Brown v. Board of Educ. Of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)) the Court, in invalidating racial segregation in the District of Columbia schools, said….”
The Key:
DQ = Dan’s Question
CA = Class’s Answer
DA = Dan’s Answer
Sample Class Section:
DQ: What year was Bolling decided?
CA: (silence)
DA: 1954
DQ: What was Bolling’s companion case?
CA: (silence)
DA: Brown v. Board of Ed.
DQ: What did the court decide in Bolling?
CA: (coughing fit in the back right corner)
DA: The court invalidated racial segregation in school
DQ: What state was Bolling decided in? This is a “not-so-clever Dan trick.” Anyone who has ever made it to law school within an hour of DC knows: DC is not a state.
CA: (the dripping of brains onto the floor)
DA: “Ah, ha! DC is not a State!”
Great job! Way to trick all of us who could care less.
Dan’s Criticisms:
“You guys are mumblers.”
“You didn’t read it right”
“Don’t read over words you don’t know. Get a dictionary.”
“That’s exactly right, but why?”
Dan’s Famous Words:
Co-terminess - A word with two meanings.
Driverable - Being fit to drive.
Trait - synonym for classification
Mumblers - Students who grumble in response to Dan’s questions.
Dubitante - I doubt that the court is right on issues of equal protection
Disclaimer (of sorts): I realize posting such criticism on a adjunct prior to taking an exam could potentially get me into a bunch of gunk. However, this class has become so overwhelmingly boring I am left with nothing else to do
Part of a class reading assignment:
“However, in Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497, 499 (1954) (a companion case to Brown v. Board of Educ. Of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)) the Court, in invalidating racial segregation in the District of Columbia schools, said….”
The Key:
DQ = Dan’s Question
CA = Class’s Answer
DA = Dan’s Answer
Sample Class Section:
DQ: What year was Bolling decided?
CA: (silence)
DA: 1954
DQ: What was Bolling’s companion case?
CA: (silence)
DA: Brown v. Board of Ed.
DQ: What did the court decide in Bolling?
CA: (coughing fit in the back right corner)
DA: The court invalidated racial segregation in school
DQ: What state was Bolling decided in? This is a “not-so-clever Dan trick.” Anyone who has ever made it to law school within an hour of DC knows: DC is not a state.
CA: (the dripping of brains onto the floor)
DA: “Ah, ha! DC is not a State!”
Great job! Way to trick all of us who could care less.
Dan’s Criticisms:
“You guys are mumblers.”
“You didn’t read it right”
“Don’t read over words you don’t know. Get a dictionary.”
“That’s exactly right, but why?”
Dan’s Famous Words:
Co-terminess - A word with two meanings.
Driverable - Being fit to drive.
Trait - synonym for classification
Mumblers - Students who grumble in response to Dan’s questions.
Dubitante - I doubt that the court is right on issues of equal protection
Disclaimer (of sorts): I realize posting such criticism on a adjunct prior to taking an exam could potentially get me into a bunch of gunk. However, this class has become so overwhelmingly boring I am left with nothing else to do