With midterms approaching the stress and tension is visibly palpable. It seems nearly everyone appears to be determined to beat the tight bell curve of a “B” average.

I can already envision the disappointment on people’s faces.

Some Whine with that Cheese

Robert Farley shares some humourous commentary about typical grade complaints on Lawyers, Guns and Ammo that dismisses expectations of the typical work-performance relationship:

But I really feel like I worked hard enough to get a higher grade.

Ideal Response: Well, if you really worked that hard, I guess that you should get a higher grade.

Actual Response: Really? Well, you’ve discovered that hard work does not unproblematically transform itself into good results. Congratulations.

And if that fails, you can always sue for personal injury if you get a “C” on your exams.

Brian Marquis attempted 15 counts against the University of Massachusetts, including civil and contractual rights and emotional distress. You can try it too, but your likelihood of success is slim. (No, that was NOT legal advice).

So What’s the Big Deal?

The reason why students put such a disproportionate emphasis on grades, as opposed to cooperation, teamwork, charisma, work ethic, and everything else that really matters in the work force, is that they are led to believe that their career hinges on it.

And it’s true, most of the large commercial firms use the quickest and simplest method to sort the piles of applicants – by ranking by grades.

Aside from alternative careers in law, many of the most creative and talented young lawyers blaze a bold path in a totally different direction.

Remember that nearly half of all Canadian lawyers are self-employed.

If you can bear to look at your own transcript, knowing how hard you worked regardless of the letter listed on the paper, all of this really doesn’t matter that much. Everyone knows that law school exams do not measure your intelligence, knowledge, or even your ability as a lawyer. All they test is your ability to write law school exams.

Larry Ribstein, law professor and Chair of the University of Illinois College of Law, shares on his blog:

What I really am looking for when I’m honest about it is not originality, creativity and the flash of insight, but regurgitation of the readings and the brilliant thoughts I uttered in class. If I wanted creativity and originality, I would ask questions like, “In blank verse, tell me the most important thing about this subject you did not learn in this class.” Or, “what flower did this course most remind you of?” But instead I ask the students to play “where’s waldo,” in prose form, with the legal issues in fact patterns that look like cases they read or talked about in class.

A Better Response?

I don’t know how true it is, but a lawyer friend of mine in a big firm once told me,

“A” lawyers eventually work for “C” lawyers, because the former have their noses dug to deep into the books, while the latter have more balance and a personality that clients relate to.

Maybe a better response is for students to start grading law firms instead. The New York Times reported a grading initiative by law students at Stanford using criteria of diversity, including gender, ethnicity, and orientation.

Although some Canadian firms are making considerable progress in this regard, many still have challenges recruiting and retaining diversity (and it is retention that is the key).

But perhaps the best approach of all is to ignore all of the hype and just have “fun” learning, as summarized by Sherry on Stay of Execution:

…quit freaking out and turn your attention to the fascinating and baffling topics they’re asking you to learn THIS semester. You are just as smart and full of potential as you were in September. Smarter, in fact. Go learn.