Xifeng wrote:I always use my outlines on exams, but I also always know where to look when I see an issue (like I'm not reading through my outline to see what the problem is, just to get more details and cover everything). But other than that, I second 2014's recommendations. How you write the exam is really key.
With that being said, what is a generally safe way to format answers? I was going with the: 1) spot the issue and say what it is; 2) state the rule; 3) give an argument and counter argument and 4) come with a conclusion.
I'm guessing that diving into some of the spotted issues more than others helps too? Consensus from my profs was that I spotted the issues but that I need to improve the structure. They both said they didn't want to recommend a certain way to format because every prof looks for something different.
Just wondering if there is a general format that if followed could help me steer clear from another quarter of low grades?
I usually don't study in groups because things tend to get off track; perhaps I wasn't with a study group that would work best for me. Also, I met with an academic counselor and they helped me lay out a plan for when I should have my outlines done and basically gave me a pep talk saying that things will improve and that taking law exams is a skill in its self, not always a reflection of who understands the information the best and that the fall quarter is worth as much as one of the Torts or Property finals. Although it did give me a warm and fuzzy, I'm ready to make my numbers rise.