I wish I hadn't looked at my prof's previous torts exams.. Forum

[09042014]

I can see being a little pissed about randomly throwing in policy, but you said you know he did test on some policy. But you don't really have any right to be pissed that the format of the issue spotter isn't the same. Profs don't give practice exams so you can prewrite your test.

What happened is you panicked and you let a little unknown crush your performance.

If it was truly hard, everyone did shitty. In fact, that you studied so hard, you probably will do better on a hard test. But, 2300 words on a presumably 3 hour exam is a bad sign.

[09042014]

Not sure why you're being dickish about it. The professor released the exams for practice; the implication is that the exams released would be similar in style. I don't think anyone is saying that they expected the same exact issues to be tested, just that they are frustrated that the few datapoints that signal what is expected of them ended up being misleading.

Do I really need to connect the dots? The professor offered those exams for practice... nothing more. Practice with the issues that the class covers. Reading into the release of exams to the extent that you expect anything on the final exam is NOT HOW YOU PLAY THE GAME.

If I were a professor, I'd give back exams just to fuck with the people who think that they're being super sleuths by trying to read into my thought patterns or whatever. If you want a prediction on what will be on the final, you're probably better off calling Miss Cleo than relying on previous exams. The risk is about the same.

Meh so far 3/4 of my exams have been almost identical to the past exams. For one, it was basically a different fact pattern, but the same question verbatim. It's not unreasonable to not expect a prof to suddenly divert from a trend.

But it is unreasonable to demand they stick to pattern.

IMO it's shitty that some professors basically give the same test every year. It hurts people who genuinely know the material in favor of incessant gunners. At least don't go boo hooing that it's different.

[094320]

..

[WSJ_Law]

2300 words on a 7 page hypo.... Yikes..

[ben4847]

Who the hell does policy questions in LWR

I was kind of wondering that.

[arvcondor]

this same thing happened to me in Crim. Not a visiting prof, so I had 15 of her past exams to look at. Every. Single. One. was an issue spotter, then she hit us w/ some weird shit on the final. I freaked and froze up. Didn't follow directions, etc...pretty bad.

I've been having a hard time getting over it, but everyone in my section says it killed them, too, so I have no other choice but to wait a month see how I did and hope the curve takes care of us. Good luck...have faith in the curve, seriously.

Exam same scenario in my crim class. And the one-issue spotter was this fact pattern based on Occupy Philly that was so bizarre it was surreal.

[Geist13]

The worst part about profs who do this is that it rewards students who slacked off and didn't practice on past exams while it punishes those who diligently worked through all the past exams.

If you worked hard and diligently you should know the material and be able to answer the question regardless of its form. Unless, of course, by worked hard and diligently you mean "didn't know the material well enough to actually apply it and instead wanted to just type out a rehearsed, thoughtless answer." If that's what you mean by worked hard and diligently, then yes, novel exams punish working hard and diligently.

[ObLaDiObLaDa]

But, 2300 words on a presumably 3 hour exam is a bad sign.

This. There is no reason to stress about your grade now because it will do absolutely no good. What is done is done. But if you really want to continue in law school, for the sake of your future grades and mental health you might want to take some time this break trying to deal with your test anxiety/issue with policy questions. 2300 words in a 3 hour exam is extremely low. If you're honest with yourself and really believe you knew the black letter law cold, you need to get a handle on your ability to deal with your anxiety during your tests when you're thrown something you really didn't expect. 2300 words on a 3 hour exam, a torts exam nonetheless which lends itself to a lot of explanation, is bad.

[mrloblaw]

The worst part about profs who do this is that it rewards students who slacked off and didn't practice on past exams while it punishes those who diligently worked through all the past exams.

If you worked hard and diligently you should know the material and be able to answer the question regardless of its form. Unless, of course, by worked hard and diligently you mean "didn't know the material well enough to actually apply it and instead wanted to just type out a rehearsed, thoughtless answer." If that's what you mean by worked hard and diligently, then yes, novel exams punish working hard and diligently.

How do people use practice exams as such a crutch anyway? Am I the only one who presumes that knowing the material inside and out is sufficient to get a non-shit grade?

My only guess is that a lot of people have no interest in actually learning the course material and get pissed when they can't pre-write their answer and call it an "outline."

[prezidentv8]

Who the hell does policy questions in LWR

I was kind of wondering that.

Also my thought.

[Cupidity]

Am I the only one who presumes that knowing the material inside and out is sufficient to get a non-shit grade?

Spoken like a 1L.

[flcath]

Okay, this OP's situation actually sounds bad... some of these threads you read and think, "this could be an A-, for all we know."

Still, "bad" is an entirely relative thing. You WON'T get below a C-, and I'd say there's maybe even a 50/50 chance you'll pull a B-.

[mrloblaw]

Am I the only one who presumes that knowing the material inside and out is sufficient to get a non-shit grade?

Spoken like a 1L.

2L, thx.

[paulinaporizkova]

2300 words on a 7 page hypo.... Yikes..

[jjlaw]

The thing is, your classmates probably also expected his exam to be like his previous exams. So most likely, you were not the only who freaked out, and most of the class probably did poorly than they expected. I think you can only hope that other people might have freaked out more than you and wrote even worse. 2300 words is not a lot, but if you touched on the right points, you could still pull a median grade.

We had a similar curve ball on our torts exam, but it wasn't so unexpected because we had discussed the topic throughout the semester (toxic torts). But it wasn't your classic issue spotter as much as it was analyzing what a company could do about a toxin that might lead to problems later on. It threw off a lot of people, and I can't say I'm completely confident with my answer. But I overheard people saying that they talked about the history of products liability for their answer, so I know that I was at least on the right track. Anyway, moral of the story is, you can only hope that other people were also thrown off and did worse than you. But I would not sit there and think that you were the only person who freaked out and did poorly.

[D'Angelo]

one of our professors gave us lots of practice exams and then used a different professor's exam for the final! some people did the same thing for us but everybody in our section had the same problem so the curve helped!