Top Law Schools

what should a good seminar paper look like
The other day our professor put a past seminar paper on reserve and it's like 18 pages of summary: he goes over the statutes of 50 states and gives a summary of the overall trend or something. I would call it a summary, not analysis. If there was analysis, then it's like less than 10% of the whole paper.

I refrain from asking my professor because it would be like doubting his good judgment (well, maybe the rest of the class wrote worse papers, who knows?)

I know it'd be hard to think of something truly original or insightful, given most of what we can think of have been written, if not overwritten. But isn't a good seminar paper supposed to contain more substance?

Anonymous User wrote: isn't a good seminar paper supposed to contain more substance?

Yes.

Anonymous User wrote:what should a good seminar paper look like
The other day our professor put a past seminar paper on reserve and it's like 18 pages of summary: he goes over the statutes of 50 states and gives a summary of the overall trend or something. I would call it a summary, not analysis. If there was analysis, then it's like less than 10% of the whole paper.

I refrain from asking my professor because it would be like doubting his good judgment (well, maybe the rest of the class wrote worse papers, who knows?)

I know it'd be hard to think of something truly original or insightful, given most of what we can think of have been written, if not overwritten. But isn't a good seminar paper supposed to contain more substance?

What does this have to do with legal employment?

Iam OP.
scared of revealing my identity ....

what's so funny is the author of the said paper was on law review and published a LR note (better work for sure).

I thought i missed something - I reread his seminar paper and even footnotes, which are mostly referential, id. not inferential, see id.