Monday, September 24, 2007

Left Brain / Right Brain

{Click on image to view.) Prop_diagram_3

All of us who are blessed with sight have some degree of visualization capability.  Often, accessing that right-brain function can bring clarity to a text-based problem that borders on incomprehensible during the stress of an examination.

Do you tell your students to draw diagrams during the pre-writing stage of exam-answering?  Consider showing them how.  Of course, the illustration above (based on a standard Blueacre & Whiteacre real property problem) has more actual words in it than the diagram the student would make in the rush of an exam session – these words are for illustrative purposes here.  If you demonstrate how to convert a Property exam problem into a sensible (literally) representation, be sure to stress that abbreviation is essential! (djt)

September 24, 2007 in Exams - Theory | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

Recycling

In all the time I've written for this blog, I don't think I've mentioned that my husband is an environmental lawyer.  His main area of work is clean air and climate change.  He works for an environmental non-profit (and for those of you doing the math, that does make us the lowest paid attorney couple in all of Massachusetts) where he spends a lot of time discussing global warming (and no, my nickname is not Tipper). 

Anyway, as a result of being married to "Captain Environment" (which is what I call him when my pleas for a minivan are rejected), we are big recyclers.  We are the people who drain the juice boxes and put them in our recycling bin.  I've tried looking for the recycling symbol on the little straws too, but so far no luck.  Anyway, to do my part in reducing global warming, I am recycling an older blog entry (or as the Car Talk guys put it, "an encore presentation") on exam writing.  Why?  Not because my brain is empty (although my "fill brain" light did go on recently), but rather because I find that I am printing this entry out for students at least twice a day.

So here it is, just in time for spring exams:

Exam Writing is Different:

Exam writing is different from first year legal writing because, while the usual 1L legal writing class teaches writing as a craft, exam writing is a skill. What does this mean?  Legal writing for class is something that students have more time to work on; in addition, almost the entire exercise is about students' organizing their thoughts and choosing their words carefully. Exam writing, on the other hand, is a formulaic way for students to show their professors that they not only understand the material but can also use it.

If legal writing is a painting, exam writing is a photograph.  Exam writing must be done quickly and accurately; and while it must also be done with some creativity and is worth the same 1000 words as a painting, it has to be more stark and realistic. Some of the best 1L legal writers will not do well on their exams because they cannot leave an answer in its raw form. Rather, they need to hone their thoughts and organization until the answer is perfect; and frankly, they do not have the time to do it, so their grades do not reflect their knowledge of the subject or their writing ability.

So how do we prepare students to let the raw answer be and move on to the next question? I do the math with students, trying to make the point that one fabulous answer on a four part exam is still unsatisfactory, while four reasonably complete and cogent (but imperfect) answers will suffice. I teach them the exam mantra:  "the issue is...the rule is....here we have....therefore..., next."    I think I hear students muttering this during exam week, or I'd like to think that's what they are saying as they pass me in the hall....

I also advise taking old exams under exam conditions (timed without notes and books) so students can figure out their ideal ratio of time to organize vs. time to write (usually about 20%/80%). I talk about organizing answers by party (good for torts, not civil procedure) or by transaction (excellent for contracts, but not for torts), etc. I give the old tennis analogy (you still need to follow through after you’ve hit the ball) as a way of reminding students to include counterarguments and defenses. I, personally, had to write the word DEFENSES at the top of every exam in law school lest I forget to include them.

After working in academic support for a while, I have concluded that a student’s performance in the first year legal writing class may not be an indicator of how well that student will perform on exams. Oddly, only about half of the students I see find this comforting. (ezs)

March 20, 2007 in Exams - Theory | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, November 30, 2006

Multiple Choice and Grocery Shopping

At this time of year I am inundated with students who are stressed about upcoming exams and in particular the multiple choice format that many of these exams will take. I give them all my standard advice: practice, practice, practice. Why? Well, certainly not because when they don’t get this as the punch line to the joke, “how do you get to Carnegie Hall?” it makes me feel really ancient, but rather because it (hopefully) works.

Practicing multiple choice questions from a variety of sources gives students more fluency in the language of the topic they are being tested on. I analogize (and I analogize a lot, it is a lot like, whoops…) it to moving to a new city and doing the crossword puzzle in the local newspaper. When I lived in New York and did the puzzle (on Mondays and Tuesdays only), and the clue was, “off-white,” the answer was usually “ecru.” Here in Boston, (where I can sometimes last until Thursday) the answer is, “beige.” How did I realize this? The same way you get the Wang Center.

Also, sometimes (and I know this would a very rare circumstance) doctrinal professors actually get their multiple choice questions from other sources. This means that the language used in the questions may differ somewhat from the language used in class. This really can throw students off (especially ESL students), because they are not accustomed to seeing the issue raised in this slightly different terminology. Practicing questions that come from many different sources: study aids, on-line lessons or bar review books, can help a student see the “disguised” issues more frequently.

Another strategy I offer students for dealing with multiple choice questions is to read the question with the answers covered. Then, they should come up with an answer in their heads, match it to one of the options and move on (yes, you do need to uncover the answers at some point). I think this is sound advice based on my experience as the sole food shopper in my household. (I think maybe my experience in Academic Support has played a small role, but I am not sure.) Here’s why: when I go shopping without a list, I find that I end up with many items I don’t need, fail to get some items I do need and invariably spend more time and money than I intended.

Multiple choice answers use the same marketing approach as the supermarket: make it look good, and they will buy. Almost every answer on your exam will look plausible if not downright compelling (like that $1.00 giant tub of Fluff sitting in my cabinet). That is the nature of the beast. If you go shopping for an answer, chances are you will be pulled in by the display. If you have a list (or the answer in your head) prior to your shopping trip, you are more likely to make the right choices.

And finally, like grocery shopping, you should never go to your exams hungry. (ezs)

November 30, 2006 in Exams - Theory | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, September 27, 2006

CSI-ASP

Finally, my students who found themselves outside of good academic standing (would that be academic sitting? lounging? lying about?) have come to see me with their exams from last year (also known as, “the reason why I have to see you…..”). So now what? 

I just had a student come by with three exams from last year. This student had not talked to the professors who graded these exams except, evidently, to request a copy. Copies in hand, the student came to me looking for the reasons why his/her grades were below par. One professor kindly included an outline of the major issues and how they were to be resolved as well as a copy of the exam itself, the others did not. None of the professors included their multiple choice questions or the student’s score on them.

So, I read the exams. I tried to decipher the various marks left by the professors. Some were easier than others, like the “?” or the “No!” But most of the marks were mere numbers to be added or subtracted from the student’s total for scoring purposes. So what else is there to do but call in my personal (that is: living in my head) Crime Scene Investigators.

First, I called in the spot the issues (“STI”) expert. The spot the issues expert examined whether, thanks to the outline provided by the professor, the student found all the possible issues to be discussed. Then, I called in the correct rules applied (“CRA”) guy who looked for whether the student had, in fact, not only spotted the issue, but actually used the correct tool to get a plausible answer. Finally, I consulted with my use the facts (“UTF”) expert who looked at whether the student used almost every fact contained in the question. These experts were only able to operate on this one exam because the professor had left me with some clues to work with. In the end, I had to ask the student to talk to at least one of the other professors.

As to the exam I could investigate most fully, I diagnosed a “kitchen sink” type of crime, that is: the student used every rule they knew and contained therein was the correct rule, but because there was so much superfluous analysis required for the issues that hadn’t really arisen, the real issues received short shrift.

I will have to file the other exams away until the student sees the other professors. Hopefully, in ten years, someone from “Cold Case: ASP” will be able to figure out what went wrong. (ezs)

September 27, 2006 in Exams - Theory | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, May 12, 2006

Motherhood

About a week ago, I had a student come into my office after her Property exam.  She tearfully told me that she didn't finish the exam because she had only left herself twenty minutes for the last question (where the exam had apportioned one hour).  Nothing I said, or could have said (I now realize) made her feel any better.  She left my office weeping. About thirty minutes later I left the building on my way home and saw an ambulance out front.  I was frantic--had my student succumbed to the Property exam?  I actually looked inside the ambulance to find out. It wasn't her and I was greatly relieved, but I still felt that I offered her no comfort.

And that bothered me.  I have both described and criticized as being very maternal in my support style.  Under rare and appropriate circumstances (and with consent and all sorts signed waiver forms), I will hug.  I always have candy and tissues.  I have helped students find bridesmaids dresses and doctor referrals, but I could not help this student. 

I told my tearful student that it was not the end of the world; but to her it was.  I told her that knowing her, the rest of the exam was great and what she did manage to write for the last question would probably have been another student's best effort given all the time in the world.  She wasn't buying it.  She asked about having to repeat the class if she failed.  I truly do not believe that she failed, but I answered her questions after prefacing them with my belief that the information provided would not be useful for her.  She stormed out of my office more upset than when she entered.

Basically, short of tap dancing (which would have been an ill-advised attempt at humor); I had used up my repertoire of "it's ok" tricks.  My firm belief in her intelligence and preparedness wasn't enough and that is okay.  I was more worried that since this was the first exam for first year students that her belief in herself was shot as well.  I haven't seen her since and I don't expect to.  I doubt she realizes that I am still worried about her or that I scared some lovely Boston paramedics by sticking my head in their ambulance because I thought she might be that distraught.

Today, another student came to me and complained about the same exam.  I asked him if he finished it, and he said yes.  His problem:  the exam was too hard. Why?  Well, he said that he had been surprised that there was a whole essay question on future interests on the test.  He had believed, based on his empirical analysis of prior exams that future interests only appeared on the multiple choice part of the exam.  I assured him that if he had studied well for the multiple choice that he was also prepared for an essay.  He disagreed.  So, I told him, in contrast to the first student, that the singer they voted off of American Idol on Wednesday was far more surprising than a future interests question on a property exam (in fact it was downright shocking, I thought the guy was a shoe-in, but that is another story for another blog).

In the end he wanted to know if I thought he should ask the professor if was going to fail.  I told him that the professor had probably not graded the exams yet and that his answer was likely to be, "I can't tell you yet;" and that would not provide any comfort at all and might, in fact, be more upsetting.  Again, I doubt I'll see him again.

In the end, I think I my reactions to these two students indicate that I have achieved complete ASP motherhood.  And in that vain, I wish myself and all the rest of the ASP mothers out there, a Happy Mother's Day. (ezs)

May 12, 2006 in Exams - Theory | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, May 1, 2006

Good I OAT!

Here in the still chilly northeast, exams start later this week.  Since part of any ASP office's duties include some exam time cheer-leading, I had seriously thought of wall-papering our bulletin board and office area with notices that read, "Good Luck on Exams from the folks at ASP!!!!!"  (I do tend to use way too many exclamation points!!!!!! So I'm enthusiastic; is that a crime?????????) But then I thought better of it. 

Certainly I have not taught my students that their exam performance has anything to do with luck.  Sure, there can be some luck involved; as in:  "wow, I am sure lucky that last question had to do with adverse possession because I knew that one cold."  There is absolutely no luck involved in knowing it cold.

Knowing the material comes from doing the reading, going to class and outlining.  Knowing the material comes from studying the outline and spending the time to study effectively and efficiently (Dan is right, sleep is very important!).  So I have revised my sign.  Instead of wishing my students luck, I wish them this instead:

Good Issue-spotting!
Good Organization of your answer!
Good Analysis!
Good Timing on the exam so you can finish it all!

So essentially, I wish them all Good I OAT.  I think it may catch on; and it may lower your cholesterol as well. (ezs)

May 1, 2006 in Exams - Theory | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Advice on Answering Essay Questions, with a Great Illustration to Boot

Professor Rogelio Lasso of the John Marshall Law School has put together some great advice for taking essay exams in "How to Write a Good Law School Exam." Particularly helpful is his advice on how to develop and outline an answer for a typical essay question.  Best of all, he includes an example question with a model outline of the first part of the answer to illustrate the techniques he suggests. (dbw)

April 26, 2006 in Exams - Theory | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Time to Fly

As the semester comes to an end, I have been telling most of my students (the ones who have been seeing me based on their midterm grades) that they have earned their wings and it is now time to fly. These students have done all the work and they are ready for exams.

As part of this conversation, I always ask these students if they feel they are in a better place than they were last semester at this time. And the answer really should be “yes” regardless of whether I have worked any ASP magic on them or not. Why is this? Because last semester at this time, these students had no idea what law school exams would be like. They did not know (which is not to say it wasn’t knowable) the level of depth each answer required, nor did they understand that spending the time to outline your answer before writing it, was analogous to priming the exam pump. But now they do--or should.

I think of this “exit pep talk” like the first comforting words of Dr. Spock’s book on babies, “You know more than you think.” Or actually, sadly, more like those old cigarette ads, “you’ve come a long way, baby.” (This, of course, is language one would never use with students but I think it really captures the moment.)

Second semester first year law students (we’ll call them “SSFYs”) are far more savvy about exams than first semester students. I imagine that even those students who performed well on the first semester exams have a better sense now of why their performance was superior than they did in January. What do SSFYs know now that didn’t know then?

SSFYs know how to write a case brief that is shorter than the case.
SSFYs know how to create a rules-based outline.
SSFYs know that Prof. Tonsing’s post on “practice” is dead on and have practiced hundreds of multiple choice questions and a fair number of essays per class, or plan to, in preparation for exams.
SSFYs know that the analysis is the most important part of the essay exam answer.
SSFYs know that the potential answers to a multiple choice question are all intended to look compelling and to not look at them before having an idea of the answer in their heads.
SSFYs know that their grade is not personal.
SSFYs feel more at home here.

SSFYs know (most importantly) they will live through exams and that the sun will indeed rise the day after they are over.

Did I teach them all this? I’d like to credit for it, but I cannot. All I may have done is make students aware that they know more than they think. (ezs)

April 26, 2006 in Exams - Theory | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, April 20, 2006

Exam Plan II-Strategies by Subject

In the fall I wrote about having an “exam plan,” that is, a time management strategy for getting through the reading period and exams. But I have been thinking lately about having another sort of exam plan in addition to time management.  I have been asking students to come up with an exam strategy, that is, a method they plan to employ while taking the exam to maximize time efficiency and organization of their answers.

I know it sounds a little like a carnival tonic, but here’s the idea: have a plan of attack for each subject. For example, a student could plan to tackle a Torts exam by creating a chart of the parties v. the other parties (after reading the question, of course), listing the potential causes of action that arise between each set of parties and then use this chart as a check list of issues to deal with in their answer. It would probably look something like this:

A v. B-negligence, battery

A v. C-negligence, tortuous interference with a K

A v. D-nuisance

B v. C-assault, etc.

In Contracts and Civil Procedure the strategy could be more chronological. Think of it as an obstacle course, what are the hurdles to be cleared? In Contracts, a student needs to deal with formation, and then the terms of the contract, and then if there has been a breach, and finally if there are damages from the breach and then remedies. Don’t forget to think outside the box and cover non- and quasi-contractual concepts as well. In Civil Procedure, a student might have to think through jurisdiction,  complaint, answer, 12(b) motions, joinder, discovery, summary judgment, etc.

I have advised students that having a planned course of action before even starting the exam is a good idea. If you have a closed book exam you might want to memorize a very skeletal checklist of potential issues and immediately write it down on your exam paper. In an open book exam, bring your “obstacle course” with you. I also have advised students that this kind of planning can be done collaboratively with a study group (as opposed to outlining which should be done alone).

Personally, I had to write the words, “counterarguments” and “defenses” at the top of every one of my exams. I guess I had a problem with being wrong. (ezs)

April 20, 2006 in Exams - Theory | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, April 19, 2006

Excelling on Multiple Choice Tests

For an exceptionally thorough explanation of strategies for answering multiple choice questions, I must again recommend that you check out Vernellia Randall's advice, this time to bar takers.  She provides detailed explanations of question types and analytical methods for addressing them.  Her advice is as relevant for law students as for bar takers.  Take a look. (dbw)

April 19, 2006 in Exams - Theory | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, April 3, 2006

Exam Angst Starts Early

And I don’t mean in March as opposed to May, I mean in third grade as opposed to law school.

Last week my nine-year-old took her reading MCAS (Massachusetts Cruddy and Stupid, I mean: Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment Scale) exams, and she was truly worried about it. She was afraid these exams would define her forever as either smart or not. I tried to re-assure her that this was not accurate; after all it is my job to tell (relative) grown-ups this everyday.

She didn’t buy it.

I explained that this is more a test of how well the school and her teacher are doing in the business of third grade teaching. She didn’t buy that either. I have to wonder, if I can’t convince a nine-year-old, are any of my law students reassured by anything I say? I’ve always thought that people found me believable, or at the very least harmless (for example: people ask me for directions at least twice a day no matter what city, town or country I am in!).

I find I say the same things in different ways for different students, but basically my message remains the same: exams are an indication of how well you answered a certain set of questions on one particular day out of your whole life. And while how you do on this limited assessment is important, it should not be all defining.

Which is not to say that you should not be prepared for exams: they are not, after all, random. Students need to attend class, outline in some way, and study effectively and efficiently for these exams. Students also need to know what is expected of them on exams: not the actual subject matter per question, but the level of depth required in answering each question. Our doctrinal professors do give out this information but a number of students do not engage in this highly important dialogue until after the grading is done. A number of professors offer to give students prior exam questions and then give feedback on how the student answered the question.

This is law school gold and yet students rarely partake of the riches offered. Why? I’m still not sure. A student’s imagined exam must be far worse than the real exam but, for some reason, not being surprised by the format or the way the questions are asked is not a priority for many students.  I am baffled by this because the way our school prepared the third graders for the MCAS was to have them do sample questions from prior tests. This seems to be tested and proven technology for exam readiness. So, as we ease into the lovely spring days of April, I will be chanting, “old exams, old exams, old exams” in the halls here.

In the end I reassured my daughter that she was prepared because she had practiced similar questions for weeks and done well on those. This, I think she bought, because during the three days of testing her only comment was that she was excited that they recess twice a day on MCAS days and that was “cool.” And if you are ever lost in Boston (or anywhere else), come and find me and while I may not be able to help you find your way, you will be in no danger whatsoever. (ezs)

April 3, 2006 in Exams - Theory | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Exam Review

We all tell our students to take a look at their exam answers after the grades are posted.

Many ask, "What exactly am I to look for when I read my old answers?"

Dr. Amy L. Jarmon, Assistant Dean for Academic Success Programs at Texas Tech University School of Law, offers an answer.

"I thought the attached excerpt from an e-mail that I sent to all of my law students might be of help to colleagues," Professor Jarmon wrote to me recently. 

The excerpt is entitled: "Patterns to Look for and Questions to Ask When Evaluating Multiple-Choice and Fact Pattern Essay Exam Answers." 

Take a look at Dean Jarmon's work. I intend to post it for my students, and direct the professors at my school to this web copy of the excerpt.  (djt)

January 24, 2006 in Exams - Theory | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, November 29, 2005

Outlining the Essay Answer

            James Kilpatrick, in his book The Writer’s Art, tells us that a writer “functions as a kind of forest guide . . . escort[ing] the tenderfoot along an unfamiliar trail.”[1]  Kilpatrick observes that this “metaphorical forest ranger would find himself in trouble if he embarked upon a hike with no plan of getting from Point A to Point B.”[2]  Therefore, he advises, “Before we begin a letter, an editorial, a brief, or a note of instructions to the babysitter, we ought to have a clear idea of the points we intend to make and the order in which we intend to make them.”[3]

            Novice writers, however, have a very difficult time accepting Kilpatrick’s advice because they cannot shake the feeling that outlining is a waste of valuable writing time.  Nowhere is that reluctance more evident than in the way most students approach writing an answer to an essay question on an exam.

            When a student has sixty minutes to answer a particular essay question, everything in him screams that there is no time for outlining the answer.  He must begin writing – NOW – if he hopes to get everything said.  He begins writing, therefore, almost immediately after reading the question.  He may jot a note or two in the margin of the question and may underline a word here or there, but he is not going to waste his time preparing an outline that no one will read and that will garner him no points.

            That approach, of course, misses a key point about writing:  writing is a form of thinking; the written product itself is only as clear as the thinking that preceded it.

            A student who understands that principle knows that she cannot begin writing in mid-air if she hopes to provide the reader with a carefully reasoned and well-crafted response to a complicated question.  She understands that, even under the time pressure inherent in exams – perhaps especially under the time pressure inherent in exams – thinking before writing is critical.

            Therefore, she takes time to brainstorm the points she will need to cover, rereads and rethinks the question, revises her brainstorming, and converts it into an outline of points and sub-points that follow a logical plan leading to a carefully considered and thoroughly explained conclusion. 

In other words, she thinks before she writes the answer itself because she knows how writing works and how reading works.    She knows that to begin writing in mid-air is to think inefficiently and to do it on the reader’s dime.  She knows that unless she plans before she writes, the reader will treated to her confusing, inefficient, meandering attempt to think through the question.  She knows her reader will find himself wandering in the woods, off the trail and unable to find his bearings.

            She also understands that she can write as least as much by thinking and planning first as she can by simply musing in a stream-of-consciousness form. The irony for the student who thinks he hasn’t time to plan is that he will waste at least the same amount of time writing in fits and starts, rereading his answer to find where he has been and where he is headed, and staring into space trying to think of what should come next.

            The primary difference between the two writers is that one spends large amounts of time inefficiently groping for words and the other spends that time efficiently designing a fully considered response.  The planner takes no more time than does her colleague, but her end product is coherent and easily read.  The non-planning writer, in contrast, produces no more prose than his colleague, but his answer is a photograph of his confusion as he attempts to figure out what he needs to say; so his professor watches him stumble through the thought process with all its missteps and false trails. 

Worse, because the unplanned writing is likely several pages of prose, it defies any attempt by the writer to see what is missing or to cut out what is extraneous.  The trees obscure the forest, so the writer misses issues and sub-issues, arguments and counter-arguments, because he cannot see the big picture and the parts’ relationship to one another. 

The planner, on the other hand, steps back from her outline and makes a final judgment as to what is there, what is missing, and what should be jettisoned.  She can see the gaps and the illogical arrangements, and she has not committed several pages of writing to missteps.

If we can help students realize that writing is in fact a thinking process, we can help them see that the best writing product is an end result of thinking carefully.  Taking time to think using some sort of sketched outline, even during time-pressured exams, is critical to producing thoughtful prose.  Thoughtful prose, in turn, is the sort of prose most likely to lead the reader comfortably and efficiently along the unfamiliar trail of the writer’s analysis; and it is the type of prose most likely to provide all the steps necessary to complete the journey.  (dbw)

            


[1] James J. Kilpatrick, The Writer’s Art 29 (1984).

[2] Id. at 34.

[3] Id.

November 29, 2005 in Exams - Theory | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Exam Writing Is Different.

Exam writing is different from first year legal writing because, while the usual 1L legal writing class teaches writing as a craft, exam writing is a skill. What does this mean?  Legal writing for class is something that students have more time to work on; in addition, almost the entire exercise is about students' organizing their thoughts and choosing their words carefully. Exam writing, on the other hand, is a formulaic way for students to show their professors that they not only understand the material but can also use it.

If legal writing is a painting, exam writing is a photograph.  Exam writing must be done quickly and accurately; and while it must also be done with some creativity and is worth the same 1000 words as a painting, it has to be more stark and realistic. Some of the best 1L legal writers will not do well on their exams because they cannot leave an answer in its raw form. Rather, they need to hone their thoughts and organization until the answer is perfect; and frankly, they do not have the time to do it, so their grades do not reflect their knowledge of the subject or their writing ability.

So how do we prepare students to let the raw answer be and move on to the next question? I do the math with students, trying to make the point that one fabulous answer on a four part exam is still unsatisfactory, while four reasonably complete and cogent (but imperfect) answers will suffice.   I teach them the exam mantra:  "the issue is...the rule is....here we have....therefore..., next."    I think I hear students muttering this during exam week, or I'd like to think that's what they are saying as they pass me in the hall....

I also advise taking old exams under exam conditions (timed without notes and books) so students can figure out their ideal ratio of time to organize vs. time to write (usually about 20%/80%). I talk about organizing answers by party (good for torts, not civil procedure) or by transaction (excellent for contracts, but not for torts), etc. I give the old tennis analogy (you still need to follow through after you’ve hit the ball) as a way of reminding students to include counterarguments and defenses. I, personally, had to write the word DEFENSES at the top of every exam in law school lest I forget to include them.

After working in academic support for a while, I have concluded that a student’s performance in the first year legal writing class may not be an indicator of how well that student will perform on exams. Oddly, only about half of the students I see find this comforting. (ezs)

November 16, 2005 in Exams - Theory | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, November 4, 2005

Exams are (a) Scary, (b)....

Multiple Choice exams are definitely more in vogue these days than when I was in law school. We had one exam in my three years of school that had some multiple choice questions and it was considered quite controversial at the time. Yet, today, many faculty members use the multiple choice testing format in first-year classes as early preparation for bar testing since those subjects will be covered in the multi-state part of the bar.

Many first year students haven’t been tested in this format since the LSAT— and were not tested this way for quite some time before it. When a student performs poorly on an exam, I always ask if there were multiple choice questions on the test. Then I ask the student to find out if her score on the multiple choice questions was a key factor in making her grade so low. Often it is, but then what?


The only true method I’ve found for being comfortable with multiple choice questions is the same advice I give to folks who are looking to go to Carnegie Hall: practice, practice, practice!!! Then:

  • I will tell students about roots and foils and distracters.
  • I will divulge the statistical evidence that B or C is often the best guess when all else fails.
  • I will warn them about always and never, etc.
  • I will help a student understand why we test this way, although good advocacy could never be so certain.

We actually give an entire academic support lecture on the multiple choice exams. It is well attended. Our advice is simple: study the same way you would for an essay exam and do a lot of practice questions before the exam. Make sure you include your professor’s “what ifs” in your outline: after all how many ways can the issue arise? Practice using questions written by the same professor would be most helpful, but these are rarely found because the questions are so hard to write.

Yet, many students find this method of testing daunting. Is there really any consistency between our teaching them to “think like lawyers” and the ability to come up with the one best answer to a question? Haven’t we all taken the name of adult protective garments in vain by professing the most accurate answer often is “it depends”?  Advocacy really depends on testing the limits of the law, not confining it to one sentence.

In the end, we may be uncovering students who will not perform well on the multi-state and giving them a “heads up” that they have two more years to practice these skills; or we may be undermining our academic ideals to teach to a test. No judge will ever ask an attorney to answer a question in this format, but no judge will be sitting on the bench without having done so herself. (ezs)

November 4, 2005 in Exams - Theory | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)