kasparov wrote:onthecusp wrote:sundevil77 wrote:I feel rather pissed off about my exam experience for two reasons:
(1) A ridiculous, draconian 2500 word limit for a 3-hour torts exam. I feel like I wrote intelligently and concisely about all relevant (not tangential crap) in the first hour long issue spotter. Come to find out I was already at 1400 words . Needless to say, I tried to write even more concisely for the rest of the exam. With about 20 minutes left I had to go back and cut out over 400 words to get my exam back within the word limit. Even then, I still knew there were other relevant issues that were going to be left out. You'd think a professor in his first semester would err on the side of not having an unduly restrictive word limit. Whatever.
(2) He tested on issues that we barely covered in class, while leaving out issues that he spent the most time on. We literally had nothing on factual cause, proximate cause, and nonfeasance/special duties. Nada. We spent weeks on that stuff. I feel betrayed.
We have a 1750 word limit for our 3 hour property exam....not looking forward to it.
same for torts, 1750 words / four hours. how the hell do you distinguish yourself with such few opportunities? everyone is going to see the big stuff, and you can't waste time or space on creative/novel sub issues.
Our prof is asking one issue spotter, and the other is a philosophical question regarding the direction of intellectual property...no multiple choice, just the two essay questions.