have you ever done well in a law exam even though you thought you stuffed up badly? (2 Viewers)

[MichaelJackson2]

indeed, frigid. looking forward to studying admin law next year! heard it's extremely boring.

 

[Frigid]

indeed, frigid. looking forward to studying admin law next year! heard it's extremely boring.

agreed. thank god i put it passed me three years ago.

in other news, TWENTY FOUR HOURS LEFT OF LAW STUDENTNESS!

 

[Marmalade.]

Go into your (open book) exams with your own summarised definitions of the law and a very short paragraph of relevant cases so that once you spot the issues in the exam question, all you need to do is copy exactly what you've got in your summary as to what the relevant law is. This should be the quickest and easiest part of your exam.

Then, from what you've just written down, apply it to the exam question by explaining how the law and/or cases can be argued, is similar to, or fits into, the current exam problem. It may be necessary to argue from the perspective of all parties in the exam problem.

One of my lecturer's justified making an exam closed book by saying that too many students made law about creating a good set of notes by typing what the lecturer says verbatim and then transcribing these words during the exam. Like if someone copied their notes and considered 'applying the law' to be changing "plaintiff" and "defendant" to the names used in the exam problem.

 

[RogueAcademic]

One of my lecturer's justified making an exam closed book by saying that too many students made law about making a good set of notes and then transcribing them during the exam. Like if someone copied their notes and considered 'applying the law' to be changing "plaintiff" and "defendant" to the names used in the exam problem.

1) People are entitled to their own opinions, even lecturers.

2) I also mentioned somewhere that some lecturers are horrendously bad teachers.

3) Studying law is more than just copying notes. Preparing exam notes is part of the overall process of learning.

4) If it is as easy as your lecturer says, everyone would be getting HDs.

 

[Marmalade.]

You misunderstood me. The lecturer was against copying notes, that's why he made it closed book.

 

[RogueAcademic]

You misunderstood me. The lecturer was against copying notes, that's why he made it closed book.

Copying someone else's notes to take into the exam or making your own notes and transcribing them during the exam?

Oh wait, I see you've clarified your post above...

 

[RogueAcademic]

too many students made law about creating a good set of notes by typing what the lecturer says verbatim and then transcribing these words during the exam. Like if someone copied their notes and considered 'applying the law' to be changing "plaintiff" and "defendant" to the names used in the exam problem.

What exactly is the problem then? Is he saying that you could give any person off the street these same set of notes and they will perform just as well in the exam since 'applying the law' in this way is far too easy?