JohnDorian wrote:I've been reading a lot about UofC Law and I saw something where the Dean said something along the lines of: UChicago is a place where reading headnotes on cases isn't enough to succeed, you're expected to delve into the material and come to class ready to be pushed.
I have heard talk like this quite a bit at ASW, too. So, do you feel that this claim (that UChicago is unique in that you delve into the law (etc etc)) affects exams?
Maybe to delve into this question a bit further, do exams look different because you're at UChicago? Do professors look for different types of answers on them? I know most (if not all) of you haven't been to other law schools, but is the structure/grading of exams different than what you're told in 0L books like GTM or LEEWS? Or does the claim derive from in-class discussions and stuff like that?
I know you're going to shoot for the ask again before your exams angle, but I really think this would help us as we approach 0L prep and it would let us know if we should be taking notes on this kind of stuff in class (plus exams must be fresh in your mind considering the date ).
Feel free to wait until after exams to answer! To echo:cjcregg wrote:GOOD LUCK ON FINAL EXAMS!!! You helpful posters have certainly earned good karma.
Please don't do any "0L prep," except maybe reading GTM. It is a total waste of time.
As far as how exams are structured, it is completely different from professor to professor, which is part of the reason that 0L prep is worthless. In terms of format, content, structure, the amount the professor wants you to "delve into the material," all these things are different even among just the professors at our school.