How to approach an exam question? (outline, notate, etc.)

[seahawk32]

Talk about the way you approach an exam question.

Q's off the top of my head..

- How many times do you read the facts?
- Do you make notes on the fact pattern, and if so in what detail?
- Do you write as you see issues, or make an outline/answer sketch first?
- How frequently and for what reason do you access your larger outline during the exam?

[DocHawkeye]

Normally, I read the facts all the way through once without worrying about annotations. This way, when I get to the called question, I have the basic facts in mind. Often, in my experience, there will be one or two red herring facts. I then begin to outline an answer, working backward from the called question (for example, "What damages is P entitled to?") through the issues that you need to resolve before the called question can be answered (for example, before we can award damages in a breach of contract action, was there a contract? And then, "well, was there a clear acceptance of a valid offer supported by consideraton?" Then "What defenses does D have? Impossibility? Substantial performance?") For each of these I might refer to my outline to make sure I have all of the elements or to see if the UCC might take me someplace othen than the common law. I susally make my outline in Exam4 (or whatever exam software you use) and they take the form of headings in my final answer. I refer quickly to the facts as I sketch each heading. Finally, I flesh out the headings, reading the relevent sections of the facts many times to make sure I am applying the facts to the law correctly.

[mr.hands]

tagged and bumped