Uni Life - Not a reflection, but an analysis

What's spurred this particular blog post, a particular comment I received recently from an Imperial College student.

'I never had time for anything. All I did was study'

It's not the first time I heard this comment. The same comment phrased slightly differently was said from a deligent student in a university in Thiruchengodu, Tamil Nadu, India.

I don't know if the situation is different in Australia. My particular case might not be the best representative of an Australian student life. But I know Australians, even if they don't study a lot, sure do work a lot. They work so much, they don't have time for anything else either.

Doing a number of things makes you smarter at the way you do a number of things. You learn to squeeze 10 pages of reading into 10 minutes and not 20 minutes. You optimise time.

But there is a saturation point. Just like 10 pages can't be squeezed into 2minutes, overloading us with information, isn't going to get us smarter. This is what I criticise about the education system in some universities. Teach us the techniques to be smart learners, but don't feed us with information to the extent of making us machines that just grind the material, but don't really think for ourselves. How many of us would have thought 'If only I had the time, I would have done that' or 'I'll do it after exams, I just don't have time now'. The number of missed opportunities to discover ourselves.

Higher Education Legislation Amendment (Student Services and Amenities) Bill 2010

I think facilities at my university are just fine.
The government is just using another excuse to charge money from student's who already have a massive HECS debt hovering over their head.
Those who want sporting facilities etc should pay for it.
The opt in structure works just fine.
So many protests took away compulsory student unionism.
Let's not go back to it.

Why did I study LAW?

I often ask myself this question. In the five years I've studied law, why did I actually study it?
And now its popping up on job applications, that I actually need a proper answer.

But that aside, (cos we all know noone says the entire truth in job apps), why did I really study law?

Even if it was part marks, and being able to do it, I couldn't have entirely chosen the course on a whim. But thinking back, I can't place a particular dying reason for chosing the course I did.
I was never the ones who had my entire 10years of life planned out in advance. Seriously, I don't even know what I'm going to do tomorrow, let alone the next 10years!

But the intersting thing in choosing my course ,was that, whilst I chose it overnight, my interest in law (even if misplaced) arose well before that. I think it was in year 10. I remember scoring 20/20 on some pointless assignment about ourselves, and I remember writing 'I want to be a lawyer, becuase there is no retirement; Retirement for a lawyer is becoming a judge'. Ha what a comedy. What I didn't know then was, judge's retire as well. (I can't believe my health teacher bought it first of all).

But secondly that, aside from retirement, the law profession is one of the most overworked professions (which is another reason you have to really love what you do) . By fourth year I discovered this, cos law students didn't sleep much either. But aside from my misconceptions about law, even in those early mature days, I had dreams of wearing the black coat and standing in front of a judge and speaking. (even before i knew the different between a barrister and a lawyer). So that's probably what found me in a law course.

Plus the fact that I like solving problems. As a kid, I'd borrow all the lateral thinking puzzles in the library. I just loved them. 10years back though. I don't have that sort of time to sit and stretch my brain these days. (see too much education is bad, it restricts your thinking)

But the problem is, some law problems don't actually have solutions and I didn't have time to find one. For my science brain, there would always be a solution, a fixed solution. Something as neat as the chemical periodic table. University thrashed these ideologies. No clear answer was found even after 300 pages of judgement in the Mabo case.

I guess, I just kind of lost it at uni, with my noble ideas of law. I enjoyed the challenge as I always do. But it killed my enthusiasm. I was merely struggling to keep up. I merely applied the law as it existed. Why bother looking into 10 other judgements, I'll just copy what's in the study guide said. It was very mechanical and taxing . It was just so far away from the profession. I missed the notions of actually helping people. The people notion disappeared at uni. It was all text and heavy books that you bought with your entire life savings. I was feeling like how the public would portray a lawyer 'money hungry,' by the end of it all.

But hey law is about the people (or the corporations). But university showed me facts and figures (i.e the law), not how it impacted on the people. I needed to wait and see the practical side of things. Which the Jessup moot did. It was like this amazing close to real life problem, and in the 3 months of doing it, I though it was sooooooo real.! Two real countries bashing each other's throats out at the International Court of Justice. Now that was exciting! Not 13 weeks of lectures (not meaning to) but force feeding us knowledge so we could pass this exam paper in 3hours. When in actual fact, that could have been an A class moot topic in front of a judge.

I'm in the final 3 weeks of my law degree. I've discovered what I love about law. Helping REAL people figure out the law. Advocating on their behalf. I've discovered what sux about a law degree tooo (which is another blog). But I can't wait to enter the profession! SOME ONE OUT THERE PLEASE JUST LET ME THROUGH THE DOOR, YOU WONT REGRET IT. PLEASE JUST GIVE ME THAT FIRST JOB.

Stigma and Universities

It has to be more than a mere coincidence that every person I know who got a seasonal clerkship fails to get a priority placement in the law firm.

And I thought getting a seasonal was 80% guaranteeing you a graduate position.

I fail to understand why you won't be selected after, tireless efforts of working your arse of, chatting up staff, and even in some circumstances writing praise after praise of the firm in careers guides to help recruit to the firm even smarter people in future years.

I just fail to see the justice. Has it got anything to do with the name of uni? I wonder.

Logically it doesn't. Cos they did take us for seasonal clerkship position. But it still makes me ponder.