Please don't talk rubbish and justify the hiring of poor faculty. A large number of people teaching at NLSIU and Jindal are NLU alumni from Kolkata. Among social science faculty, places like JNU, TISS and the IITs are swarming with people from Bengal. Yet, NKC will hire terrible faculty and deliberately overlook the pool of good talent from Bengal -- for reasons all of you know.

I'm really disgusted to see the pro-NKC posts being put up here by vested interests.

A few years ago, I attended some classes for an LLM module alongside an ILS graduate at one of the London law schools which people like to view as a backup option if admission to Oxbridge masters programmes don't work out for them. This gentleman and I were in a legal theory class together. Most of us agreed that his attempts to do the readings put in just about the minimum amount of effort required (and often less), his understanding of the readings was shallow at best and his contributions were, therefore, superficial and unhelpful (despite, per his own claims, him being among the top students at ILS).

His starting salvo in this legal theory seminar was rather unfortunate. He committed that most embarrassing faux pas - showing off to the teacher what he'd learned in his undergraduate jurisprudence class before the first seminar in this legal theory course had even started, speaking in the very vaguest of terms about the Hart-Fuller debate - vague enough to sound smart to the uninitiated from civil law jurisdictions, but also vague enough to leave his hearers (especially the more discerning ones) unsure if he actually knew what he was talking about. The teacher, an Israeli with the three juicy Oxford degrees of BCL, MPhil and DPhil under his belt and an enthusiastic proponent of Joseph Raz's ideas about how patiently to suffer fools in his class, was not amused (and showed it, with his usually cosmopolitan English pronunciation, which had only a hint of foreign accent, becoming much more gutteral for a few minutes). Over a period of 10 weeks, I think that would have ended up having an impact (how perceptable that might be is something we can discuss) (on a very small scale, in terms of sample size) on the perception of his uni, based on the fact that there were graduates from universities around the world, including two other Indians - one guy from DU (and me) - a Japanese who was on government scholarship from his country, an Albert Campion-style Brit (with many of the trappings, including the high voice, the ability to talk nonsense when he felt Like and the "piculiarly inoffensive countenance"), who liked to liked to pretend that his intelligence was 2/10 when it was more like 7 or 8/10, and a Mexican, all of whom did a lot better than our ILS friend (both in terms of classroom performance and, if my sources on the grapevine are to be relied upon, in the exam as well). Seeing as we exchanged LinkedIn profiles, I am pretty sure most of us saw the name of that guy's undergrad uni.

Does this represent the overall quality of ILS kids? Or was this guy an exception? What was he about - an unmotivated character who was hoping to achieve a job in the UK legal sector without doing the hard yards? Or someone who was having a year-long professional vacation after a few years of law firm life? Or maybe he just didn't like the legal theory class very much? Most of these questions I am not qualified to answer, because I didn't bother getting to know the guy beyond exchanging LinkedIn handles and a pleasantry once every couple of weeks. As for the last question, he did admit once that he regretted taking the legal theory class, that it was outside his chosen specialisation, that he'd taken it purely for fun and now found it a bit dull.

Take these observations as you will and please advise as you like.

Okay. I mean honestly I know what I’ve tried and what I haven’t. If you can sit online and say shame on me for not being “inspiring enough” and that it’s my fault this is how multiple educators across multiple institutions feel. That’s just a choice you have made.

While yes a small number of students were consistent in being hungry and wanting to learn when we were in college- it wasn’t 1. at least in my batch at law school there were ten solid people who were driven and motivated and consistent and competed with each other to become the best we could become and genuinely liked and wanted to learn the law. And that small number you could depend on. Now basically everyone thinks law is just a scam they can pull by chat gpting their way through it.

But nah. It’s just me. I’m just bad at being inspiring. Okay. Shame on me I guess. Don’t worry buddy I’ll leave soon.

If teachers like this, no wonder the education system is in drains. You are the adult in this situation, you are incharge of guiding and motivating the children. Instead you turn it around and blame the students.,who barely have become adults. Remember your own days, how many 'highly' motivated classmates did you have ? We all know, it was like just 10% who really wanted to "learn". The rest wanted to just enjoy their college life, or complete attendance quotas or worry only when assignments and exams were due. Yet, remember there was always two or three professors who always had everyone's respect, who held the gaze and attention of all. Those professors never cribbed and complained like you do. They didn't blame the students. Instead, they empathised with the lack of attention of students, and taught in a way that helped everyone. Shame on you to not highlight these kinds of professors, yet come here and just cry.

be interested in your subject area, show/fake genuine enthusiasm, if you show interest your students would also become interested, interest is always infectious. It is difficult to show enthusiasm in your fourth class/tutorial of the day where you may have to go over the same topics which you have done for the last two years - even then adress your class as if it is the only topic in the entire world which matters.

be punctual, stay the course, do not show favortitism (although you may have favourites), use examples/analogies to explain concepts (this is the true mark of a good teacher), provide feedback, have an easy go attitude (esp outside class)

try out empirical research (if you are interested), it is sorely lacking, publish only in scopus (it is not a marker of quality, but is required for promotion), do not publish a book until you feel that you have acquired some idea/knowledge in the field, keep in touch with the industry, ultimately law is a practice oriented subject so it has to have some practical utlity (not just Kelsen), focus on how the impact of the law is and try to bring in the why

Oh yeah. I definitely will change careers. That was the point of the post. But I would push back on the idea that this is just some personal failing. People I have worked with across different institutions, male and female, old and young , foreign educated and not, all feel that something has changed. My older colleagues have told me that post covid batches are not like what we got before at all. Consider that it’s not always the teachers who are insufficient.

I was interviewed by two offices. They’ve been happening in a staggered fashion since the end of May, from my understanding, as the vacation is on. I don’t think the process has concluded though.

More generally, the rank list merely makes the interviews a possibility. It’s not like the UPSC. It’s up to the discretion of the office to then further select people to interview based on the CV. Being on the rank list doesn’t entitle anyone to an interview automatically. I don’t understand the ‘non-transparent’ critique since discretion is inherently somewhat random and subjective? A person can like or not like a CV for any number of reasons. It’s like asking a law firm HR to list out why they liked or didn’t like a CV. Sure, rank is one objective metric but it is not the determinative factor here specifically because of the nature of the job, where you’ll be working out of a judge’s house and the relationship is a bit more interpersonal than a regular one of a boss and employee. Maybe a judge wants to encourage clerks from marginalised backgrounds, or the candidate has done some research that is relevant to their usual roster. All this can’t be captured by rank alone.

The registry clerkships do rely more heavily on rank so if you’re not dead set on a judge’s office, those recruitments will also happen later so keep an eye out.

Job satisfaction is a myth that snowflake Gen Z kids have been deluded into believing. Your motto should be to hustle and earn as much as you can and also to spend on expensive things. You may feel frustrated and tired, but you will look back later and be happy that you did it. You will be able to retire at 50 with a luxury flat, luxury car and kids in IB schools headed for Ivy League colleges. Your colleagues who opted for job satisfaction won’t be able to get even a fraction of this and will be full of regret.

If there is one thing you'll see when you move away from this website, is that there are no chill work hours ever, anywhere, anywhere of substance atleast. T1 or T2 or T3 work hours will stay mostly the same unless your team is a sinking ship. What matters is the people which again are good bad and average everywhere unless you yourself are a horrendous human.

All things considered in your 20s my advise would be to stick wuth a tier 1 and gradually look for a shift when priorities change and responsibilities increase. T1 is definately easier in your 20s than any other stage.

How many times have you failed CLAT? I'm just asking because your parents' money seems to be repeatedly wasted, considering that what you need instead of more CLAT prep is a primary school "Reading and Literacy 1.1" class, where you start from the alphabet, all over again. You really do need that class - you know that, right?

Honestly, it’s funny how you’re quick to criticize someone who’s literally built their legal career from nothing and done a lot to boost India’s arbitration reputation. You clearly don’t get how much effort that takes.

Instead of writing pointless posts like this, maybe try doing something useful yourself. Your words just show how useless and insecure you are. May you achieve something in life

I think he is known more for his work in area of #emergencypowers overseas, and in JGLS itself he is mostly known for Criminal Procedure and Evidence. He used to teach an elective on Law and Psychedelics but I think he has stopped it now. Cannabis decriminalization is just one of the things he is doing. We should take a look at the entire body of work someone has done before labelling them.