PLAP 3810

This class is a joke. And a complete waste of time. You learn NOTHING, except some weird, trivial and mostly irrelevant facts about each case and there is no discussion about any reasoning/arguments behind each court decision, or any explanation of difficult legal concepts relevant to each case. Paper and exams are completely unrelated to class material. Worst class ever!!

Disclaimer: I am writing this review to give a different perspective from those for this class (PLAP 3810) and the second component (PLAP 3820). This will also be a lengthy review, but I write it in the hopes that it helps whoever reads it to form a more complete understanding of the course and the professor. Yes, he does make jokes during the lecture and some of them do fall flat; but I don't think it is as often or as bad as previously alleged. As for the instruction style, as far as I can tell, the class seems to operate along the lines of a flipped class. I imagine if one has never taken a flipped class before, it will come as a bit of a shock. However, to say you learned nothing also speaks to the amount of effort you put into the course, not just Professor Todd's instruction. Moreover, I've always found him to be very accessible and eager to talk with students (I mean, he gives everyone his home number) so if you have questions or are confused, just ask him. Additionally, Professor Todd mentioned many times at the beginning of the semester that it was important for us to take time outside of the classroom to learn and understand the cases and how they relate to the course themes (mentioned many times throughout the semester). Now to get into the details of this class specifically. This class is essentially Constitutional Law. We were graded on a mid-term, 10 pg paper, final, and class participation. The Socratic method was used (this is the cold calling). Admittedly, I hated the Socratic method (this was my first class using it) but I found it forced me to understand the cases better and it became easier with time and practice. The material (standing & justiciability) and doing the case briefs at the beginning of the semester was difficult. The concepts are very abstract and the case briefs just take practice to master. But as the semester progresses, the material gets easier as well as doing the briefs. The class subject itself (con. law) is notoriously regarded as a dull drag, and that was true for this class. However, if you spread the case assignments out through the week (1 or 2 a day), it becomes less painful. I would only recommend it if you are considering going to law school or just have a burning desire to learn con. law. Overall, I did think this course was a good metric for law school, and for those students who don't think so, I'm sorry, but I'm not sure what you expect law school to be. It will be similar to this class, insofar as you will be expected to learn the cases on your own, you will be cold-called, and if you don't know the material, you aren't going to do well in the class. I've often found that reviews are shaped by student's grades, so for reference, I got an A-. The best advice I have for success is to relay as much information as possible. If you think you've done enough, do more; just make sure you budget your time. This is also something Professor Todd tells you. Professor Todd is a tougher grader, so use the first mid-term as a learning curve. If you improve your performance, he takes that into consideration in your course grade. I also took PLAP 3190 before this and thought it was actually very helpful. I know this is a lengthy review, but I thought it would be more informative than those just bashing the prof.