Finals time is rapidly approaching! By now, you are probably finalizing your outlines and doing your best to digest, memorize and understand the material you learned throughout the semester. In addition to outlining, try to fit in as many practice tests and hypotheticals as possible. As I have discussed in earlier posts, law school requires not only committing the black letter law to memory, but also understanding the courts’ holdings well enough to apply them to the exam hypotheticals drummed up by your professor.
During my first semester of 1L, I struggled with bridging the gap between memorizing the relevant law and applying it on exams. I could easily regurgitate every holding of the cases discussed in class but could not extract the law on a high level and recognize it when attached to different facts. It is difficult to identify legal issues on an exam, especially when the professor gives students a seemingly never-ending hypothetical and asks test takers to simply “spot the issues.”
For example, in Vosburg v. Putney, the court relied on the eggshell skull rule to reach its conclusion: defendants take their victims as they find them. In Vosburg, a child playfully tapped his classmate on the shin and due to the classmate’s preexisting injury, the tap caused an unexpectedly severe result: loss of use of the limb. Seems easy enough, right? I was able to grasp the eggshell skull rule as it related to Vosburg but had trouble applying it to analogous situations. Let’s say a plaintiff has osteoporosis and is shot with a BB gun by the neighborhood troublemaker looking for a laugh. From the shot, Plaintiff broke all of the bones in her body. On an exam, the concept of the eggshell skull should be discussed and Vosburg cited. Like in Vosburg, Defendant would be liable for all of Plaintiff’s injuries even though her bones are weaker than a reasonable person (unaware of her condition) would expect.
Assuming that your exam is open book (as most law school exams are), your outline will be helpful after you deduce the relevant issues being tested. By exam time, you will know your outline like the back of your hand, flip to the relevant section, know what you need to address and then apply the rule of law to the facts of the hypo. I am here to help with the initial step: how do you know which issues to discuss in the first place?
Cue “taking the test backwards.” I developed this study technique after receiving average grades my first semester of law school. I was not scoring as well as I wanted because I was overwhelmed by the long-winded exam hypos and in turn, missed big ticket issues. After my outlines were about ready, I made a separate document listing the key concepts that I was 90% sure would be tested on the exam. For example, if at first you do not see consideration tested on your Contracts exam, take a few moments to re-read the prompt, it is possible that you missed it. I would also add whether an offer has been made to your list. If after reviewing your list, you still don’t see a concept tested, don’t stress it, the professor could have left it off the exam or tested it in a separate section.
In terms of general test taking processes, do a quick read of the exam prompt and note the issues that easily jump out at you. Then, do a more thorough read, taking notes again. After this second read, look at your list of the major course topics discussed above. Don’t spend more than 3-4 minutes on it, this “taking the best backwards” tip is only intended to double check your initial read and serve as a backstop if you need it. Again, it is always possible that your professor threw a curveball and did not test consideration on your Contracts exam, so don’t force it!
This method best served me when I was feeling overwhelmed by long hypotheticals and had trouble focusing. As with any test-taking tip, try it out on a practice test to see if it works for you before exam day.
Good luck and you’ve got this!
Comentários