Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
aedpaj

Feedback on the following first-year thematic courses

Recommended Posts

Hi, I am looking for any feedback/opinions on the following courses in terms of workload, professor, class engagement, etc. 

 

1. CML1105D - International Humanitarian Law (Prof Allan Michael Rock) 

2. CML1105H - Charter Rights and Remedies in Criminal Cases (Prof Jeffrey Johnston)

3. CML1105I - Immigration Health Law (Prof Yin Yuan Chen) 

4. CML1105L - Access to Justice-refugee claimants (Prof TBD)

5. CML1109A - Public Int. Law (Prof Penelope Simons)

 

Thanks in advance! 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YY Chen is a very good prof. Took both my IL and 2L Con Law with him. Immigrants and health are favourite topics of his, so this will likely be a good course. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/16/2018 at 6:17 PM, AvocadoAbogado said:

Allan Rock used to the President of the University. Heard he is a great lecturer. Surprised it is not super full. 

If I remember from my time at Ottawa, don't you submit a list of the top thematics that you want and then get told what you've been assigned at the same time as everyone else? 

PS, I'm jealous. The new options look great. OP: What are your interests? The point of thematics is to explore things you may have an interest in to learn a bit more before committing to anything. Don't just sign up based on workload and engagement!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take Charter rights with Johnston. It's hard work (20-page paper) but he's a G. Allan Rock is also renowned

Edited by Trew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Professor Chen is one of the best law professors at UO. He's well-prepared for class, easy to follow as a lecturer, and very student-centric. The workload for his thematic was very reasonable. If you're interested in immigration or health law, the course is an obvious choice.

Professor Rock is one of the most accomplished professors at the university and is also a great lecturer. 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Recent Posts

    • What even is a "good" lawyer? How can we deliberate over if "good" lawyers are born or made, if even within legal academia, the model of what a "good " lawyer is, is still actively being explored and contested. The answer truly depends on who you ask. 
    • Yeah, North America in 2021, what an awful place to be. Get some perspective for fuck’s sake. You remind me of the guys that work in construction and think safety should be treated as an afterthought. Have you ever considered  why you have the ability to express yourself so freely whereas elsewhere you wouldn’t? 
    • I don't know why I'm continuing to engage, but fuck it.  You were mocked (correctly) for making some very strange claims about genetics. I understand why you would take issue with that. No one likes to be mocked. But are non-lawyers being mocked here? I don't think so. I think it's just an objective assessment that lawyers do tend to have the qualities normally associated with intelligence.  I think that many lawyers are more intelligent than the average person. But that's not a value judgment. The particular kind of intelligence needed for law is valuable for practicing law effectively. But outside of being useful for practice, I accord it very little weight. I like and admire many people who aren't especially good communicators, and probably don't have the attention to detail for law. I know many lawyers who are very smart and excellent at lawyering, but who I do not particularly like or admire. Intelligence is just one thing. There are other qualities that are far more important. I care far more about a person's compassion, sense of humour, and self-awareness than whether they can write a persuasive brief. So when I say that law isn't a good fit for most, I don't mean it as smug or an insult. I just mean that law isn't a good fit for everyone. 
    • yo man relax. who hurt u? You might think we're insulting you, but your manner of speaking is very condescending. The fact that you posted and deleted comments (twice!) suggests that you know this, so stop pretending like everyone is 'taking a dump' on you. On topic: there's smart and not-so-smart people in every profession. In the case of law, medicine or PhD-level scientific academia, the floor is likely higher since you had to jump through some hoops to get there that are somewhat reliable indices of some intellectual capacity. Maybe everyone could theoretically be trained as a lawyer or doctor, but you'd probably have some pretty bad ones by the end.
    • You got there pretty early, then. I needed to collect a few STEM degrees and see how many of my peers ended up getting jobs where all they did was mix buffers and run assays that come in a box that are closer to following a basic recipe than developing an mRNA based vaccine. Fortunately, the inherent superiority of their biochem degrees and the fact that they had to learn electrochem material that they probably haven't thought about since halfway through undergrad continue to provide solace.

×
×
  • Create New...