Checklist / Summary outline? Forum

[lovelaw27]

I am curious to hear from students who have already taken closed book exams on whether they wrote out a summary outline / checklist at the start of their exam. I have read from several sources and people including one of my professor’s who graduated near the top of his class in law school that I should write out a summary outline at the beginning of the exam for a closed book exam. I would think that would be a good idea. I was thinking it should generally be 2-3 pages maximum. Anyways I don’t want to give advice on how to do it because I have not actually sat through a closed book exam. Anyone want to give advice about how they structured theirs (like was it a lot of mnemonics and did you define most of the rules or just a few words for each rule or whatever), and whether they think it was a good idea to do one?

[underdawg]

i had a closed book exam that allowed us a "cheat sheet," so take my advice with a grain of salt. but this seems like a terrible idea to me. if you take practice exams, you should remember a lot more than you actually think you will. i rarely ended up referring to my cheat sheet. only for parts that were especially hellish for me to remember...maybe jot THOSE things down.

you should be spending extra time to organize your answers, not writing a 2-3 page outline. damn, wouldn't that take like 30 minutes?

[Lawl Shcool]

All my exams were closed book. I used a similar tactic to the one your describing but much much shorter. I.e. for torts I listed all the intentional torts and defenses, and for K I listed the main issues from past exams. Exams are all about time so if it takes you longer than 2 minutes your wasting time. Just develop an acronym to write down immediately then start analysis.

[lovelaw27]

I was reviewing my LEEWS primer and it said I should spend 5-7minutes reproducing course outline in skeletal fashion for a closed book exam. I guess reproducing my outline in skeletal fashion to me is somewhat vague and wasn't really sure what it would look like. Anyways maybe I will skip this step of reproducing the course outline at the beginning of my exam.

[A'nold]

I think students are INSANE if they don't do this. This is complete gold and very low hanging fruit.

[kings84_wr]

I think students are INSANE if they don't do this. This is complete gold and very low hanging fruit.

Well i may be an anomaly, but in both my closed book classes I did this on prac exams and realized it was a complete waste of time, everything I wrote down was already in my head anyways. However on my open note exams, I found that i basically never looked at my checklists and outlines anyways, cuz i knew them so well, so mabye this is just my own style.

[Lawl Shcool]

Well i may be an anomaly, but in both my closed book classes I did this on prac exams and realized it was a complete waste of time, everything I wrote down was already in my head anyways. However on my open note exams, I found that i basically never looked at my checklists and outlines anyways, cuz i knew them so well, so mabye this is just my own style.

TITCR

If your looking at notes / outlines your losing time typing. Think about it like this: every second you spend not directly analyzing the test is time spent choosing to lower your grade/rank. You need to know the material going into the test, otherwise your shooting yourself in the foot.

[apper123]

I didn't outline completely for either of my closed book exams. I got 25 % of the way through one and quit and 75% of the way through the other before I quit.

I instead focused on doing CALI exercises and practice questions out of Kaplan PMBR and Siegel's. This served me well, but I encourage you to find your "best" way of learning and memorizing. Grinding memorization sessions were not the trick for me.

I got top grades on both exams (I post this not to sound arrogant, but just to lend credibility to my comments).