Accommodation Nation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

Great. Then their grades should reflect that they are slower than average on some skills but higher than average on others

Not sure why there is this continued denial that what times tests measure (processing speed) has nothing at all to do with skills and intelligence.

When did I ever say that? Others on the thread have explained that processing speed is a component, but a relatively modest component, of FSIQ.

But it is a very important component for many if not all types of knowledge work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

Great. Then their grades should reflect that they are slower than average on some skills but higher than average on others

Not sure why there is this continued denial that what times tests measure (processing speed) has nothing at all to do with skills and intelligence.

When did I ever say that? Others on the thread have explained that processing speed is a component, but a relatively modest component, of FSIQ.

But it is a very important component for many if not all types of knowledge work.

Great work moving the goalposts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

So, if it's not realistic we shouldn't do it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

So, if it's not realistic we shouldn't do it?

Yet again, the question is whether accommodated test takers can succeed in stressful work environments. If the time limits and other constraints imposed by these exams aren’t good reflections of actual work demands, then there’s no reason to think an accommodated test taker will be unable to succeed at the job.

What exams or assessments *should* look like is an entirely separate issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

Briefs don't just get written like an essay. You must set many internal deadlines in order to get a brief written. Do you actually have any idea how law works? First I would arrange my info, then create an outline, then internal deadlines for each section that I would send in chunks to be reviewed, then time for checking all the citations, then creating appendices and getting things into the proper format. Then review. Then sit and wait for client comments. Then probably 20 minutes to incorporate any changes. It isn't a single 16 hour assignment. It is about 30 30 minute assignments that need to be done in a row. Please do not send anyone to help who needed extra time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

So, if it's not realistic we shouldn't do it?

Yet again, the question is whether accommodated test takers can succeed in stressful work environments. If the time limits and other constraints imposed by these exams aren’t good reflections of actual work demands, then there’s no reason to think an accommodated test taker will be unable to succeed at the job.

What exams or assessments *should* look like is an entirely separate issue.

Just in case every job isn’t exactly like yours, accommodated test takers diplomas should come with an asterisk so that future employer who may have different work demands know what they are getting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

Briefs don't just get written like an essay. You must set many internal deadlines in order to get a brief written. Do you actually have any idea how law works? First I would arrange my info, then create an outline, then internal deadlines for each section that I would send in chunks to be reviewed, then time for checking all the citations, then creating appendices and getting things into the proper format. Then review. Then sit and wait for client comments. Then probably 20 minutes to incorporate any changes. It isn't a single 16 hour assignment. It is about 30 30 minute assignments that need to be done in a row. Please do not send anyone to help who needed extra time.

I’m a big law senior associate. I got testing accommodations. I do plenty of assignments as described above successfully without extended time because they do not resemble the timing or other constraints imposed by law school exams.

Luckily, thanks to discrimination laws, you won’t know who got extended time unless they choose to self-disclose. As illustrated by the attitudes in this thread, I’d never advise self-disclosure but have no doubt there are many successful biglaw attorneys who got extended time because I know them!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

Briefs don't just get written like an essay. You must set many internal deadlines in order to get a brief written. Do you actually have any idea how law works? First I would arrange my info, then create an outline, then internal deadlines for each section that I would send in chunks to be reviewed, then time for checking all the citations, then creating appendices and getting things into the proper format. Then review. Then sit and wait for client comments. Then probably 20 minutes to incorporate any changes. It isn't a single 16 hour assignment. It is about 30 30 minute assignments that need to be done in a row. Please do not send anyone to help who needed extra time.

Be sure to let your colleagues know you refuse to participate in any joint defense group with David Boies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

Briefs don't just get written like an essay. You must set many internal deadlines in order to get a brief written. Do you actually have any idea how law works? First I would arrange my info, then create an outline, then internal deadlines for each section that I would send in chunks to be reviewed, then time for checking all the citations, then creating appendices and getting things into the proper format. Then review. Then sit and wait for client comments. Then probably 20 minutes to incorporate any changes. It isn't a single 16 hour assignment. It is about 30 30 minute assignments that need to be done in a row. Please do not send anyone to help who needed extra time.

I’m a big law senior associate. I got testing accommodations. I do plenty of assignments as described above successfully without extended time because they do not resemble the timing or other constraints imposed by law school exams.

Luckily, thanks to discrimination laws, you won’t know who got extended time unless they choose to self-disclose. As illustrated by the attitudes in this thread, I’d never advise self-disclosure but have no doubt there are many successful biglaw attorneys who got extended time because I know them!

They should test all students processing speed to offer everyone the same accommodations, not just the lucky ones whose parents could afford it. If they can’t do that then offer all the students extra time as needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

Briefs don't just get written like an essay. You must set many internal deadlines in order to get a brief written. Do you actually have any idea how law works? First I would arrange my info, then create an outline, then internal deadlines for each section that I would send in chunks to be reviewed, then time for checking all the citations, then creating appendices and getting things into the proper format. Then review. Then sit and wait for client comments. Then probably 20 minutes to incorporate any changes. It isn't a single 16 hour assignment. It is about 30 30 minute assignments that need to be done in a row. Please do not send anyone to help who needed extra time.

Be sure to let your colleagues know you refuse to participate in any joint defense group with David Boies.

Why do you keep bringing up Boies? He didn’t get extra time on tests, yet he succeeded anyway.

“Boies learned to compensate for his disability by developing outstanding powers of concentration and a keen memory.”

“The way Boies processes written information is by first skimming a text to pick out the salient points. Then, by slowing down and focusing exclusively on these, he is able to analyze them critically and grasp the essence of the text. It is this unique ability that enables Boies to handle the large volume of reading required for his work, and that helped him excel in college and law school, despite his poor performance on timed tests.”

https://dyslexia.yale.edu/story/david-boies/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

For a lawyer, you're pretty weak at making convincing arguments. You've given no reason for timed tests and have argued why they don't relate to the real world, but also can't articulate why we still need them, just that we shouldn't do away with them. Why?

I'm fine doing away with speeded tests. I've said that earlier. I'm not taking a position on whether timed tests should be done away with because that's not the purpose of this discussion. This discussion is about whether students who are receiving accommodations on timed exams as they currently exist can be successful in stressful, elite work environments.

There is no way that you were ever hired by Big Law with these writing skills. Also, you are hilarious if you think BigLaw deadlines have a several day lead in. I can't tell you how many last minute all nighters I pulled. I generally didn't even know what I had to do that day until around 5pm as the deadlines came late and hard. You are not qualified to give advice.

If you're pulling an all nighter to meet a deadline, it's not like a timed exam..................

And don't worry, I was on law review (made it via blind reviewed writing competition only), published my note reviewed blind (one of 10ish at my T14), got honors in legal writing (top 3 in the class), did a federal clerkship, have worked at two biglaw firms, and am a senior associate.

If I'm told at 5pm that I need to write a 10 page brief by morning, it very much is like a timed exam. This happened many times. Litigation. If we found something, we weren't waiting to file. We would jump. Higher than we thought possible. Several times, I would actually have to be in NYC by morning also in order to have my own eyes on the final product being filed. This is why clients paid so much.

Yes, this is a realistic situation. But you have *checks notes* 16 hours to write that brief. That’s a stressful assignment, absolutely. But that’s not the 45 min, 90 min, or 4 hour exam time limit. It’s more akin to a 24 hour take home, where you don’t get extended time as an accommodation. This is my point.

So, if it's not realistic we shouldn't do it?

Yet again, the question is whether accommodated test takers can succeed in stressful work environments. If the time limits and other constraints imposed by these exams aren’t good reflections of actual work demands, then there’s no reason to think an accommodated test taker will be unable to succeed at the job.

What exams or assessments *should* look like is an entirely separate issue.

Just in case every job isn’t exactly like yours, accommodated test takers diplomas should come with an asterisk so that future employer who may have different work demands know what they are getting.

This country is getting sicker and sicker as too many lawyers type professions
( extractive and non productive) sucking it dry…..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My experience coming from a top private is that the top kids don't have academic accommodations unless they are legit and have been in place since elementary school for things like dyslexia or severe ADHD. The ones beneath the top20% scramble to get accommodations in place for anxiety in 10th/11th grade. However, by-in-large this doesn't work to catapult them into the top20s and they end up at colleges ranked above below the top20. And then their parents scramble to get accommodations in place in college--both for the classroom and for housing. A number of these parents I know contacted housing to get their kids private rooms, center-of-campus dorms, etc.

Meanwhile the kids aren't confident and they become increasingly anxious. Because all this hand holding and heavy-intervening by their parents doesn't go missed by the kids themselves. It tells them VERY loud and clearly: "We don't believe in you. You're not competent. We have to step in and help you. You're not like your peers. You have problems" Most suffer from imposter syndrome and their anxiety increases.

So really, it's not great. Stay in your own lane and don't look at these families or kids. It's not worth stressing over because it's nothing to envy.

as a professional who works with kids, i disagree completely with the second part of this. mental health issues and loss of confidence and negative self concept come when kids are not diagnosed and are being told they're not trying and it's their fault.

Agree with you 100% when the problems are legit. But the entire point is that the "anxiety" diagnosis is used by the parents to get extra time.
Because they believe that if the kid is not at the top of the class then there must be a diagnosis. Or because the kid's abilities do not align with the parent's aspirations for them. If these kids have debilitating anxiety to the degree that they can't take an exam beginning in 10th grade it's by-in-large because their parents made them anxious.

And invariably these kids don’t actually get treated in line with such purportedly severe anxiety requires. If they are not taking an SSRI and doing CBT/ACT then the parents are really just faking it essentially. Because if you have resources and your kid has a legit mental health issue it is pretty easy to research and find the gold star treatments, which are much better established and effective for anxiety than almost anything else in the DSM. And spoiler, none of these treatments involves giving a pass so a kid doesn’t have to face something anxiety provoking like a timed test.

THIS. I have a kid in my 3rd grade class this year with a 504 for "anxiety." It's literally just his parents wanting him to have "flexible seating" (Not having to stay at his desk, which he NEVER does) and so they can make excuses for his inappropriate behavior (constantly fidgeting/touching things on my desk or classmates desks that don't belong to him/using apps on his chromebook he's not allowed to/constant whining and complaining, blurting things out and not raising his hand, etc.) He gets good grades so it's not affecting him academically his is just SUPER annoying and I get so tired of dealing with him every single day. I wish his parents would just parent him, set some boundaries and hold some limits. It's clear he's never met a hard limit in his life.

[Anonymous]

99.9 percent of parents posting here did not get "special accommodations" when they went to college. And somehow they managed.

Now we have a good percentage of students at Yale, Brown, and Stanford getting all this extra special attention so they can take a very normal test.

Fragile students who will undoubtedly be a nightmare for any company that hires them.

[Anonymous]

We can keep dumbing down society by lowering expectations, but I'm not sure why people think this is a good idea or will create anything but unprepared adults. DC middle schoolers are not even expected to read a single book, not one, because it was too hard for some people to concentrate enough. I'm all for accommodations for actual disabilities, but getting more time for anxiety is just creating a self-fulfilling prophecy because you are failing to give you children the hard lessons and practice necessary to be confident.