1.  Oh, and I forgot to include what I know about Gross. A friend who took Evidence with him last year says the class was very poorly organized; they only spent about two weeks on hearsay, which was not a good situation.

2.  Gross is supposed to be the best evidence professor, if that helps.


3.  Professor Gross uses a doctored picture of Sarah Palin in a bikini for a discussion!  And regardless of whether he's teaching it next year (I have precious little motivation, and I won't be using it on checking the schedule), I'll say that Professor Gross was great when it came to learning evidence. He gives quizzes that DON'T COUNT in class, and he gives an amazing set of materials that really prepare you for the exam. There were no surprises. But then there's me. I care little about grades. Average is okay with me. I care more about learning the material. Gross presents it in a very straightforward manner. After every lesson, I walked away thinking, "Got it! It's basically common sense." Though I got a little sick of him yelling at people to speak up (Can we please stop holding classes in Room 100?), he was relatively entertaining. Cold calling but only a couple per class. I think I only got cold-called once. Of course, I missed a lot of class for the World Series and other commitments, so who knows how much I would have been called on. Go Rays. Oh, and if you've heard bad things about Gross for CrimPro, I don't think they apply in Evidence. Apparently he just drones on with stories in CrimPro. Not true in Evidence. Duke is getting beat. 51-39. Time to flip over to Everybody Loves Raymond. I only have three channels.


4.  Gross definitely knows his stuff and tries to make class interesting. However, most of class consists of going over the problems from the book, which amount to weird hypotheticals with no clear answers.  Going to class and doing the reading (there are no cases) is not really necessary, and the final was fair - mostly multiple choice.  I sort of wish I took it with Clark instead, since he would have been clearer, but I can't complain too much about Gross.


5.  Gross is the man.  At first I thought the class was sorta meaningless, since it crawled by and didn't seem like three credits' worth, let alone four.  However, the advantage of Gross is in the details.  He gives you a lot of practical tips and real life examples; I would be in clinic and remember a random FRE tidbit he threw out, which no-one else knew.  Examples are really his thing; it's how he teaches about half the class.  His bottom line is getting students to know the material, as evidenced (see what I did there?) by the swathes of study materials he'll toss at you come exam time.  I thought he was great, and the longer it's been, the more I appreciate it.  


6. Had Gross Fall 2010 for evidence.  All in all decent class and fair final (75% MC 25% transcript based short answer).  I hated that he couldn't keep on schedule.  Forced to hurry through hearsay.  Teaches problems not cases for the most part.  Entertaining guy.


Widget is loading comments...

Make a free website with Yola