Exam Preparation
Fall 2015—LLM Students
Elizabeth Ewert
ee3@law.georgetown.edu
202-662-4066
Reframing Your Studying
Or, How Do You Get to
Carnegie Hall?
Exam Studying (vs. General Studying)
• Exam-taking skills:
▫
▫
▫
▫
Spotting issues in the facts
Matching factual issues with the legal doctrine
Organizing your answer
Writing your answer
• Not exam-taking skills:
▫ Case reading
▫ Case briefing
Exam-focused studying
•Will this task help me write
a better exam answer?
•Is this task efficient?
•Is this task effective?
RESILIENCE FROM REPETITION
AFTER 2 WEEKS
WE TEND TO REMEMBER
10% of what we read
READING
20% of what we hear
HEARING
WORDS
30% of what we see
LOOKING AT PICS
PASSIVE
WATCHING A
MOVIE/VIDEO
50% of what we
see and hear
LOOKING AT AN EXHIBIT
WATCHING A DEMONSTRATION
SEEING IT DONE ON LOCATION
70% of what
we say
PARTICIPATING IN A DISCUSSION
90% of
what we
say and do
DOING A DRAMATIC PRESENTATION
GIVING A TALK
SIMLUATING THE REAL EXPERIENCE
DOING THE REAL THING
Adapted from: Edgar Dale, Audio-Visual Methods in Teaching, Holt , Rinehart, and Winston.
ACTIVE
Less Emphasis on Reading
• Reading should take less than 60% of available
study time.
• Organizing/synthesizing material; reviewing;
discussing outlines and practice questions;
attending class with energy; summarizing after
class; and practicing exam writing strategies
should take the remaining time.
Testing = Learning
Study of the “testing effect”:
Broke students into three different groups.
▫ Group 1: studied a list of words eight consecutive
times without taking any tests;
▫ Group 2: studied the list six times and was tested
twice.
▫ Group 3: studied the list four times and took four
tests.
• Two days later, those who took four tests
recalled words at up to twice the rate of those
who only studied.
(Henry L. Roediger III, Professor of Psychology, Washington University)
So, what should I be doing?
• Short answer questions.
• Writing out answers to hypotheticals.
• Perfecting study aid/outline with focus on flow
charts/questions/elements, etc.
• Explaining concepts in study groups.
• Online assessments/games—issue spotter game,
CALI lessons, bar prep materials
• PAST EXAM QUESTIONS
Excuses for not doing practice
questions
• I don’t know enough yet.
• I get discouraged when I get questions
wrong and don’t want to do anymore.
• I can’t find any practice questions.
• I don’t now how the prof will test us,
because he/she hasn’t taught this course
before.
• I’ll do questions with my study group later.
To know and not to do is not to know—
Chinese proverb
WHAT ARE THE EXAMS GOING TO ASK
ME TO DO?
WHICH PREPARES YOU BETTER?
PRACTICE THAT.
Common Exam-Writing Mistakes
and How to Fix Them
Common Exam Mistakes
• Disorganization
• Missed Issues
• Unclear Rule Statement
• Poor Application of Law to Facts
• Omitted Analysis/Reasoning
• Misstated Facts
of Organization Lack
• Problem: Your answer looks like it came out of
a blender.
• Strategy:
▫ Pick an organizational scheme BEFORE exams—
IRAC/DRAC or similar.
▫ Practice your scheme.
▫ Keep issues separate.
▫ Use headings, underlines, generous paragraphing
by subject.
Outline Before You Write
• Outline on your answer screen.
• Difficult to decide what the answer is
while you are writing the answer.
• Outlining prevents padding; the long
wind-up; fact regurgitation; rambling;
undesired tangents; cross-outs/deletions
Diagnosing disorganization
• Can you find the “issue”, “rule”,
“application of law to facts” and
“conclusion”?
• Multiple highlighter test
• Issue highlighting
Missues
• Problem: You didn’t spot an issue.
• Strategy: Identify the dispute(s) between
parties—argue both sides.
• Frame the dispute to capture issues.
▫
▫
▫
▫
PARTIES to a dispute
GOALS of the parties
WHAT ONE PARTY WILL ARGUE to win the issue
COUNTER-ARGUMENTS (and there are always
counter-arguments!)
Missues (con’t)
• Have you dealt with all the facts? (cross out
as you go) Pay special attention to facts
that first strike you as irrelevant.
• Professor includes specific facts on purpose.
• Treat it like a mystery novel—why did the
professor mention that the taillight on the
car was out?
• Check your topics outline—any other
potential legal theories you missed? (cross
out as you use).
• Match topics outline with facts.
Try it! Which facts below indicate
issues?
Kevin Huang and three associates are in the
process of forming a new corporation in an MCBA
jurisdiction, of which they will initially be its only
shareholders. Kevin will be acquiring 33% of the
common stock, which will be the only class of
shares outstanding upon formation of the
company. He is worried about dilution as the
company grows. What would you recommend be
included in the articles of incorporation, or
elsewhere, to give him reasonable assurance about
this?
Try it! Which facts below indicate
issues?
Kevin Huang and three associates are in the
process of forming a new corporation in an MCBA
jurisdiction, of which they will initially be its only
shareholders. Kevin will be acquiring 33% of the
common stock, which will be the only class of
shares outstanding upon formation of the
company. He is worried about dilution as the
company grows. What would you recommend be
included in the articles of incorporation, or
elsewhere, to give him reasonable assurance about
this?
List Matching
Topics
Facts
• Elephant
• Cat
• Dog
• Cow
• Sheep
• Barks and likes to be
petted
• Woolly coat and says
“baa”
• Moos and people drink
its milk
• Long trunk and very large
• Meows and likes to be
petted
From Open Book, Friedman, B. and Goldberg, J.
List Matching
Topics
Facts
Shareholder Agreements
• Voting
• Management
• Transfer of Shares
Preemptive Rights
• Waiver
• Limitations
• Sales to Outsiders
•
•
•
•
Majority shareholder
Start-up investor
MCBA Jurisdiction
Articles of
incorporation
• Concern about
dilution
Sample Corporations “Topics Outline”
Characteristics and Formation
• Limited Liability for Owner, et al.
• Centralized Mgmt
• Free Transferability
• Continuity of Life
• Taxation
▫ C Corporation
▫ S Corporation
Shareholder Agreements
• Voting
• Management
• Transfer of Shares
Preemptive Rights
• Waiver
• Limitations
• Sales to Outsiders
Shareholder Suits
• Direct
• Derivative
Distributions
• Rights of Distributions
• Liability for Unlawful Distributions
Shareholders’ Liabilities
• Pursuant to Shareholder Agmt
• Close Corporations
• Limitations on Controlling
Shareholders
Directors
Officers
Indemnification of Directors, Officers
and Employees
Fundamental Changes in Corporate
Structure
• Amendments to Articles of
Incorporation
• Merger, Share Exchange and
Conversion
Sample Torts “Topics Outline”
• Intentional Torts (Person)
▫
▫
▫
▫
Battery
Assault
False Imprisonment
IIED
• Intentional Torts (Property)
▫ Trespass—to land or “chattels”
▫ Conversion
• Defenses:
▫
▫
▫
▫
Self-Defense
Defense of Others
Defense of Property
Necessity
• Strict Liability
• Joint Tortfeasors
▫ Joint and Several Liability
▫ Contribution/Indemnity
• Products Liability
• Negligence
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
Unreasonable risk
Reasonable person
Malpractice
Negligence Per Se
Res Ipsa Loquitur
• Causation
▫ Proximate Cause
▫ Foreseeability
▫ Intervening Cause
• Duty
• Defenses
▫ Contributory Neg
▫ Comparative Neg
▫ Assumption of Risk
• Damages
Set of Facts
(Prof. Rothstein, Fall 2011)
• Opera singer Michael Johnson given unlabeled
Prophfthyol, an oral anesthetic used where the
patient’s heart and breathing can be
monitored, by Dr. Conrad Murphy. When
Michael is asleep, Dr. Murphy leaves the room.
Michael sneaks to the table outside his room
and takes another small dose. Michael dies
during the night, and his estate sues in tort for
the death. Can the family prove negligence
against Dr. Murphy?
Topics
Negligence
▫ Reasonable person
▫ Malpractice
▫ Res Ipsa Loquitur
Causation
▫ Proximate Cause
▫ Foreseeability
▫ Intervening Cause
Duty
Defenses
▫ Contributory Neg
▫ Comparative Neg
▫ Assumption of Risk
Facts
• Personal doctor, anesthetic used
for serious ops where patient
can be monitored, leaves patient
alone, leaves access to meds,
unlikely in absence of neg.
• Heart and breathing stopped,
which is what should be
monitored, first dose enough to
kill?, second dose taken
• Personal doctor, surgeon?,
expert on these meds?
• Second dose, could be cause of
death, Michael snuck out and
didn’t consult doctor
Torts “Topics Outline” (with covered
topics crossed out)
• Intentional Torts (Person)
▫
▫
▫
▫
Battery
Assault
False Imprisonment
IIED
• Intentional Torts (Property)
▫ Trespass—to land or “chattels”
▫ Conversion
• Defenses:
▫
▫
▫
▫
Self-Defense
Defense of Others
Defense of Property
Necessity
• Strict Liability
• Joint Tortfeasors
▫ Joint and Several Liability
▫ Contribution/Indemnity
• Products Liability
• Negligence
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
Unreasonable risk
Reasonable person
Malpractice
Negligence Per Se
Res Ipsa Loquitur
• Causation
▫ Proximate Cause
▫ Foreseeability
▫ Intervening Cause
• Duty
• Defenses
▫ Contributory Neg
▫ Comparative Neg
▫ Assumption of Risk
• Damages
IRAC and Matching
•
•
•
•
Topics List form basis of Issues
Pull Rules from outline (or memory)
Facts are basis of Application
Conclusion
A Murky Rule
• Problem: You have not clearly stated the rule or
rule synthesis in your answer.
• Strategy:
▫ Start analysis with the text of the rule, then cases
(as applicable), then policy (as appropriate).
▫ Make your outline clear, short and accessible.
▫ “The” rule is really a synthesis of many cases (not
just one case citation!); do that synthesis in your
outline in advance.
▫ Practice articulating the rule yourself, not just
reading and understanding the rule as someone else
has written it.
Law and Facts: Like a Horse and
Carriage
• Problem: Poor Application of Law to Facts
▫ Disembodied, abstract discussion of legal
doctrine.
▫ OR, conversely, repeating facts without
explaining how the law applies.
• Strategy:
▫ Talk about how these facts affect the answer
more than you think you need to.
▫ If you’re only dumping your outline into the
answer, and then moving on, you’re not doing
application, which leads to . . .
IRC-some Answers
• Problem: You got an answer, but didn’t show
any of your reasoning.
• Strategy:
▫ Don’t turn IRAC into IRC. The A is where you get
your points
▫ Point out each step of your analysis even if it
seems obvious to you—don’t jump to conclusions.
▫ Because, because, because—spell it out.
▫ IRC often happens when you know the material
best!
Truthiness
• Problem: Your version of the facts doesn’t end
up matching the original question.
• Strategy:
▫ Don’t make an error in stating the facts.
▫ Don’t invent facts.
▫ Don’t ignore inconvenient facts—those are the
ones the prof most wants you to analyze.
Tips from the Registrar’s office
• 1. Anonymity: Don’t use name (even on memo-style
exam); remove personal information from electronic
exam file; don’t ask professor for deferral.
• 2. Don’t turn in late—read the exam guidelines in the
Handbook.
• 3. Attach the right file/version.
• 4. Use word count—can’t change once submitted.
• 5. Save your exam repeatedly and in multiple places
(but see #3).
• 6. Don’t make travel plans early in exam period.
• 7. Don’t talk about exam to other students until
grades are posted.
Take-Aways
• Problem-based learning from here in
• Do interactive question answering as a regular
part of your studying.
• When you practice answering questions, also
practice your issue-spotting and organizational
skills.
• Edit your outline based on practice question
experiences.
• Double-check practice answers for common
mistakes and how to correct.