OLDFall 2022 Law School Course Evaluations

What aspect(s) of the course or instruction could be improved? The lectures were very dense and long and could have used class discussion as so many people worked or work in the field. The midterm was a bit of a mess Many of the material felt repetitive and there were guest speakers who were not the most informative. A little more kindness I would not continue using the midterm essay question of "Select a stance for this exercise: Pro or Anti-Vax," and the assigned final presentation topics of "Pro-[specific vaccine]" or "Anti- [specific vaccine]", at least in their current forms, for a few reasons. First, both positions (uniformly "Pro-" or uniformly "Anti-") are a bit reductive. The rationale of "sometimes it is necessary to argue an assigned position", while understandable, is more applicable to a specific position (for example, "Should the FDA have approved this vaccine?"), and for an assignment to write or deliver a persuasive argument, a specific position beyond "Pro-" or "Anti-" seems necessary. More generally, I am concerned that this framing of "pro- or anti vaccine" creates a false balance between the scientific consensus regarding vaccine safety and efficacy, and a position that is largely fueled by misinformation. With the entirety of drug development covered in class to draw from, there are multiple topics where meritorious arguments could be made for both sides, that would make for more presentation topics. "Should aducanumab have received accelerated approval, despite the efficacy issues?" and "Do existing exclusivity mechanisms (Orphan Drug, New Chemical/Biological Entity, Pediatric, Hatch-Waxman generic exclusivity) sufficiently balance incentivizing drug development with protecting public interests (free competition)?" come to mind.

8