How many words (on average) do you write for exam answer? Forum

[apper123]

Also, saying things like: "How could you POSSIBLY write that much??? You must have just been writing bullshit for the last 3000 words..." is essentially admitting that you didn't spot as many issues as other people. So basically, you got a lower grade.



You lose.

But, could also depend on how responses are worded. I.e
Student A: Negligence is the breach of a duty that causes harm. Duty is ... Breach is ... Cause is ... Harm is ... Here, X's had a duty because ... X breached that duty by ... X is the actual cause because ... X is the proximate cause because ... Y suffered the injury .. Thus X is negligent to Y.

Student B: X is negligent to Y. X had a duty, which was ... and he breached by ... Further, X's actions were the cause (prox and actual) of Y's injury because...


Student B will have covered same stuff, but with less words. Don't need a full description of what a fucking duty is, when there was a special relationship, or something. Building elements into analysis is a way to be more dense, and get points faster. My guess is that most people with these inflated word counts describe the entire cause of action, then apply it to facts.

Another example would be describing in detail every element for adverse possession despite facts clearly showing he didn't meet one of the elements at all. I mean if it's grey, then of course you apply the law, but if just isn't there, you aren't going to get points for restating BLL.

For torts, where we had a word limit, I combined rule and application into one.

For exams with no word limit, I just spew out the full description of the BLL first, and then move on to applying it to the facts. I type at about 125 WPM on average, and I have practiced writing the BLL over and over before the exam, so I can dump that on the exam page real easy. I think this is why my word counts are so high. It can't hurt to be over detailed with BLL if you have the time.

[1474292940502124]

Also, by my count at least 5 people finished the exam over an hour early. One guy handed his in 90 minutes before the test time was up. Really guys? Really?

They missed something. Likely more than one thing. Probably at least one of things they missed was huge.

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Also, by my count at least 5 people finished the exam over an hour early. One guy handed his in 90 minutes before the test time was up. Really guys? Really?

They missed something. Likely more than one thing. Probably at least one of things they missed was huge.

+1

[apper123]

Also, by my count at least 5 people finished the exam over an hour early. One guy handed his in 90 minutes before the test time was up. Really guys? Really?

They missed something. Likely more than one thing. Probably at least one of things they missed was huge.

Yeah, probably. I don't understand why you would even hand it in early. The utility you gain from an extra 60 minutes of free time can't be worth pouring over the exam again and again and again to be sure everything is perfect.

Also, as I'm going to lunch I hear a group of people discussing their approaches to the essay questions (I hate it when people do this, but I eavesdropped anyways).

"Question 2 was so simple man. I answered it in two paragraphs."
"Yeah dude I have no idea why she had such an easy question on there in the form of an essay. It took no time."

Question 2, to me, was the most difficult and complex question on the entire test. Either I peeled back way too many layers and missed something obvious or they missed something huge, and I'm honestly not sure which one it was.

[1474292940502124]

Also, by my count at least 5 people finished the exam over an hour early. One guy handed his in 90 minutes before the test time was up. Really guys? Really?

They missed something. Likely more than one thing. Probably at least one of things they missed was huge.

Yeah, probably. I don't understand why you would even hand it in early. The utility you gain from an extra 60 minutes of free time can't be worth pouring over the exam again and again and again to be sure everything is perfect.

Also, as I'm going to lunch I hear a group of people discussing their approaches to the essay questions (I hate it when people do this, but I eavesdropped anyways).

"Question 2 was so simple man. I answered it in two paragraphs."
"Yeah dude I have no idea why she had such an easy question on there in the form of an essay. It took no time."

Question 2, to me, was the most difficult and complex question on the entire test. Either I peeled back way too many layers and missed something obvious or they missed something huge, and I'm honestly not sure which one it was.

On a law school exam, I am gonna have to default to the latter.

[apper123]

Also, by my count at least 5 people finished the exam over an hour early. One guy handed his in 90 minutes before the test time was up. Really guys? Really?

They missed something. Likely more than one thing. Probably at least one of things they missed was huge.

Yeah, probably. I don't understand why you would even hand it in early. The utility you gain from an extra 60 minutes of free time can't be worth pouring over the exam again and again and again to be sure everything is perfect.

Also, as I'm going to lunch I hear a group of people discussing their approaches to the essay questions (I hate it when people do this, but I eavesdropped anyways).

"Question 2 was so simple man. I answered it in two paragraphs."
"Yeah dude I have no idea why she had such an easy question on there in the form of an essay. It took no time."

Question 2, to me, was the most difficult and complex question on the entire test. Either I peeled back way too many layers and missed something obvious or they missed something huge, and I'm honestly not sure which one it was.

On a law school exam, I am gonna have to default to the latter.

This was my thought as well. Our first exam had a strict word limit and the professor made it clear he wasn't looking for Nth level analysis. Annoying, but whatever. I get the feeling a majority of my class applied this same theory to this exam too, incorrectly so.

However, when I get a C in January, I'll cling to my word count to the grave.

[CE2JD]

HIGH WORD COUNT CLUB 4 LYFE YO

[wiseowl]

This thread just shows one more reason why law school is a joke...jesus, typing speed is an asset that makes great law students, that's lovely to know. What a load of crap! Screw LEEWS & Getting to Maybe and just taking a secretarial typing course so you can brain dump quickly on to your exam....THANKS law professors, who make 6 figures while doing no real work, thank you for helping to create the next generation of useless law school graduates by valuing word count over substance.

I think that being able to quickly produce high-quality, written work is a highly valuable skill and most law firms seem to agree.

If you don't like it. LEAVE.

Biglaw jobs are for closers only: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TROhlThs ... re=related

ALWAYS be closing

[apper123]

HIGH WORD COUNT CLUB 4 LYFE YO

I'm thinking of making a badge with my total exam word count on it and wearing it around for the rest of finals week with the motivation of engaging in psychological warfare. Thoughts?

[CE2JD]

HIGH WORD COUNT CLUB 4 LYFE YO

I'm thinking of making a badge with my total exam word count on it and wearing it around for the rest of finals week with the motivation of engaging in psychological warfare. Thoughts?

180

[Snooker]

This thread just shows one more reason why law school is a joke...jesus, typing speed is an asset that makes great law students, that's lovely to know. What a load of crap! Screw LEEWS & Getting to Maybe and just taking a secretarial typing course so you can brain dump quickly on to your exam....THANKS law professors, who make 6 figures while doing no real work, thank you for helping to create the next generation of useless law school graduates by valuing word count over substance.

I think that being able to quickly produce high-quality, written work is a highly valuable skill and most law firms seem to agree.

If you don't like it. LEAVE.

Biglaw jobs are for closers only: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TROhlThs ... re=related

Actually a Lexis survey recently showed that around 90% of lawyers believe that law school is inadequate preparation for legal work. There is no way in hell that the big law firms think this is a valuable skill. I have researched the topic and all the commentary points to that take home exams without time pressures are superior. Time pressured exams measure strange things, for example, they can actually test ethnicity - minorities will tend to place towards the bottom. On take home exams, the ethnicity factor fades. (several law review articles on this point) Which is more valuable, a racially biased test or a racially neutral test? Since studies of top schools show minority grads succeed equally as white students, the racially neutral test should be considered valid. and the neutral test (take home) is not a typing contest.

While I agree that the standard in-class exam is not a good measure of performance in the legal workplace, I disagree with the assertion that take-homes aren't time pressured. They ARE time-pressured - just in a way that more closely apes writing assignments in the workplace. I had a 24 hour property take home that took pretty much the entire alotted time, and was a total beast. An in-class issue spotter/policy wonk exam would have been way more enjoyable.

Well to borrow a term from contracts - usage of trade (!) - law review articles call four hour exams time pressured while do not tend to extend this to take home exams. It usually refers to a test where the pressure is just on typing everything out.

[Snooker]

This thread just shows one more reason why law school is a joke...jesus, typing speed is an asset that makes great law students, that's lovely to know. What a load of crap! Screw LEEWS & Getting to Maybe and just taking a secretarial typing course so you can brain dump quickly on to your exam....THANKS law professors, who make 6 figures while doing no real work, thank you for helping to create the next generation of useless law school graduates by valuing word count over substance.

I think that being able to quickly produce high-quality, written work is a highly valuable skill and most law firms seem to agree.

If you don't like it. LEAVE.

Biglaw jobs are for closers only: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TROhlThs ... re=related

Actually a Lexis survey recently showed that around 90% of lawyers believe that law school is inadequate preparation for legal work. There is no way in hell that the big law firms think this is a valuable skill. I have researched the topic and all the commentary points to that take home exams without time pressures are superior. Time pressured exams measure strange things, for example, they can actually test ethnicity - minorities will tend to place towards the bottom. On take home exams, the ethnicity factor fades. (several law review articles on this point) Which is more valuable, a racially biased test or a racially neutral test? Since studies of top schools show minority grads succeed equally as white students, the racially neutral test should be considered valid. and the neutral test (take home) is not a typing contest.

Then why are 1st year grades so important in the hiring process?

Also, I don't buy your "racially biased" argument. It makes absolutely no sense why RACE would have any correlation with scores on a timed test but not on a take-home test. Show me the studies and give me a concrete reason WHY this would be the case. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe the very top law schools only give out take-home tests. I believe they give out timed tests as well. I think any correlation between race and test scores has to do with the fact that there aren't enough minority applicants to go around and hence, in schools outside of HYS, minority applicants tend to have lower qualifications which may explain the correlation between lower test scores and race. But this has nothing to do with the tests being racial biased in and of themselves.

Do you think the LSAT is a qualification? Do you seriously think that the fact that blacks and hispanics have lower LSAT scores, makes them less qualified - or even less intelligent people?

I will plug away at the law reviews to find the articles again if you want. There was no control for lsat/gpa, but minorities do better on take-homes.

[CE2JD]

I think that being able to quickly produce high-quality, written work is a highly valuable skill and most law firms seem to agree.

If you don't like it. LEAVE.

Biglaw jobs are for closers only: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TROhlThs ... re=related

Actually a Lexis survey recently showed that around 90% of lawyers believe that law school is inadequate preparation for legal work. There is no way in hell that the big law firms think this is a valuable skill. I have researched the topic and all the commentary points to that take home exams without time pressures are superior. Time pressured exams measure strange things, for example, they can actually test ethnicity - minorities will tend to place towards the bottom. On take home exams, the ethnicity factor fades. (several law review articles on this point) Which is more valuable, a racially biased test or a racially neutral test? Since studies of top schools show minority grads succeed equally as white students, the racially neutral test should be considered valid. and the neutral test (take home) is not a typing contest.

Then why are 1st year grades so important in the hiring process?

Also, I don't buy your "racially biased" argument. It makes absolutely no sense why RACE would have any correlation with scores on a timed test but not on a take-home test. Show me the studies and give me a concrete reason WHY this would be the case. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe the very top law schools only give out take-home tests. I believe they give out timed tests as well. I think any correlation between race and test scores has to do with the fact that there aren't enough minority applicants to go around and hence, in schools outside of HYS, minority applicants tend to have lower qualifications which may explain the correlation between lower test scores and race. But this has nothing to do with the tests being racial biased in and of themselves.

Do you think the LSAT is a qualification? Do you seriously think that the fact that blacks and hispanics have lower LSAT scores, makes them less qualified - or even less intelligent people?

I will plug away at the law reviews to find the articles again if you want. There was no control for lsat/gpa, but minorities do better on take-homes.

It's been proven in numerous LSAC studies that LSAT + undergraduate GPA is the best predictor of 1L grades.

[prezidentv8]

I will plug away at the law reviews to find the articles again if you want. There was no control for lsat/gpa, but minorities do better on take-homes.

This whole thing is completely arbitrary. From LSAT ---------------------------------> graduation

[1474292940502124]

It's been proven in numerous LSAC studies that LSAT + undergraduate GPA is the best predictor of 1L grades.

To be fair, only best among LSAT+UGPA, LSAT, and GPA as predictors.

[Leeroy Jenkins]

I will plug away at the law reviews to find the articles again if you want. There was no control for lsat/gpa, but minorities do better on take-homes.

This whole thing is completely arbitrary. From [strike]LSAT[/strike] birth ---------------------------------> [strike]graduation[/strike] death

fixt

[CE2JD]

It's been proven in numerous LSAC studies that LSAT + undergraduate GPA is the best predictor of 1L grades.

To be fair, only best among LSAT+UGPA, LSAT, and GPA as predictors.

http://www.lsac.org/pdfs/InformationBookweb.pdf

The correlation between LSAT scores and first -year law school grades varies from one law school to another (as does the correlation between GPA and first-year law school grades). During 2007, validity studies were conducted for 187 law schools. Correlations between LSAT scores and first-year law school grades ranged from .00 to .56 (median is .33). Correlations between LSAT scores combined with undergraduate grade-point averages and first-year law school grades ranged from .27 to. 65 (median is .46).

[1474292940502124]

It's been proven in numerous LSAC studies that LSAT + undergraduate GPA is the best predictor of 1L grades.

To be fair, only best among LSAT+UGPA, LSAT, and GPA as predictors.

http://www.lsac.org/pdfs/InformationBookweb.pdf

The correlation between LSAT scores and first -year law school grades varies from one law school to another (as does the correlation between GPA and first-year law school grades). During 2007, validity studies were conducted for 187 law schools. Correlations between LSAT scores and first-year law school grades ranged from .00 to .56 (median is .33). Correlations between LSAT scores combined with undergraduate grade-point averages and first-year law school grades ranged from .27 to. 65 (median is .46).

Yeah - that's exactly what I said. LSAT + GPA is best... but only beats out GPA alone as a predictor and LSAT alone as a predictor. Probably the best predictor of 1L grades is ability to take 1L tests and understand 1L material.

[CE2JD]

Also, the best way to predict if you could have babies is to check and see if you have a vagina.

[1474292940502124]

Also the best way to predict if you could have babies is to check and see if you have a vagina.

Exactly. At least we are on same wavelength.

[apper123]

Best indicator of 1L grades is probably how well you do on your exams 1L year.

[vanwinkle]

Also, the best way to predict if you could have babies is to check and see if you have a vagina.

Technically I would think the best way to predict if you could have babies is to have one.

[CE2JD]

Also, the best way to predict if you could have babies is to check and see if you have a vagina.

Technically I would think the best way to predict if you could have babies is to have one.

You're forgetting to use the cheaper test first my friend. ALWAYS USE THE CHEAPER AND EASIER TEST FIRST!

Step 1) Check for vajayjay (if yes, move to Step 2)
Step 2) Try and get preggo

...

[macattaq]

Best indicator of 1L grades is probably how well you do on your exams 1L year.

Whoa. Mind blowing!

[apper123]

Best indicator of 1L grades is probably how well you do on your exams 1L year.

Whoa. Mind blowing!

i know amirite?