Top Law Schools

You get it. Don't be smart and all like "OMGZ MY PROFESSOR PUT A WORD LIMIT YOU'RE WRONGZ!!".

Standard issue spotter. No limit. If you didn't have over 5000-6000 words you have ZERO shot at an A/A-. Drop out now.

--ImageRemoved--

beach_terror wrote:--ImageRemoved--

amirite though?

I'm a 1L so what the fuck do I know. My torts teacher would say that more often than not the top grades are typers, so ZERO is probably lolnoutrollin... but I'll agree with a more often than not.

I do have to say, if the exam is really as zero-sum as everyone makes it out to be, I need to thank god that I grew up playing so many computer games.

Had a 3500 word limit on my Torts exam.

I checked my word count as I was finishing the first fact pattern. 2700 words. I had to cut stuff like mad, and by the time I was done, I was at about 3750 words.

Columbia Law wrote:You get it. Don't be smart and all like "OMGZ MY PROFESSOR PUT A WORD LIMIT YOU'RE WRONGZ!!".

Standard issue spotter. No limit. If you didn't have over 5000-6000 words you have ZERO shot at an A/A-. Drop out now.

Haven't seen a model answer yet with =5k words, let alone >5k words. HTFH

Yeah you're probably right w/r/t/ torts though.

Columbia Law wrote:You get it. Don't be smart and all like "OMGZ MY PROFESSOR PUT A WORD LIMIT YOU'RE WRONGZ!!".

Standard issue spotter. No limit. If you didn't have over 5000-6000 words you have ZERO shot at an A/A-. Drop out now.

Did your dog die or something? You've been trolling hard lately.

stratocophic wrote:

Columbia Law wrote:You get it. Don't be smart and all like "OMGZ MY PROFESSOR PUT A WORD LIMIT YOU'RE WRONGZ!!".

Standard issue spotter. No limit. If you didn't have over 5000-6000 words you have ZERO shot at an A/A-. Drop out now.

Haven't seen a model answer yet with =5k words, let alone >5k words. HTFH

Yeah you're probably right w/r/t/ torts though.

And this is why I'm not sure if I'm happy or sad that my torts final on Monday is MC, T/F, Short Answer.

All I know is the final description is gonna be pain.

stratocophic wrote:

Columbia Law wrote:You get it. Don't be smart and all like "OMGZ MY PROFESSOR PUT A WORD LIMIT YOU'RE WRONGZ!!".

Standard issue spotter. No limit. If you didn't have over 5000-6000 words you have ZERO shot at an A/A-. Drop out now.

Haven't seen a model answer yet with =5k words, let alone >5k words. HTFH

Yeah you're probably right w/r/t/ torts though.

The problem is that you are not goin to see 100% eye to eye to the professor. Some issues you might see and the professor might not give you credit for the analysis. It really depends on if you think in a similar was as the professor. Sometimes professors really include 10 issues on the exam. You might see 15 issues. If you write down all 15 possible issues, then you have a higher chance of covering all the issues that the professor saw on the exam.

.

thexfactor wrote:

stratocophic wrote:

Columbia Law wrote:You get it. Don't be smart and all like "OMGZ MY PROFESSOR PUT A WORD LIMIT YOU'RE WRONGZ!!".

Standard issue spotter. No limit. If you didn't have over 5000-6000 words you have ZERO shot at an A/A-. Drop out now.

Haven't seen a model answer yet with =5k words, let alone >5k words. HTFH

Yeah you're probably right w/r/t/ torts though.

The problem is that you are not goin to see 100% eye to eye to the professor. Some issues you might see and the professor might not give you credit for the analysis. It really depends on if you think in a similar was as the professor. Sometimes professors really include 10 issues on the exam. You might see 15 issues. If you write down all 15 possible issues, then you have a higher chance of covering all the issues that the professor saw on the exam.

This is an excellent point that I was thinking about today--and really it's BS. I don't believe LS grading is completely arbitrary like some make it out to be, but it is far more arbitrary than the grading in a lot of other academic fields.

thexfactor wrote:

stratocophic wrote:

Columbia Law wrote:You get it. Don't be smart and all like "OMGZ MY PROFESSOR PUT A WORD LIMIT YOU'RE WRONGZ!!".

Standard issue spotter. No limit. If you didn't have over 5000-6000 words you have ZERO shot at an A/A-. Drop out now.

Haven't seen a model answer yet with =5k words, let alone >5k words. HTFH

Yeah you're probably right w/r/t/ torts though.

The problem is that you are not goin to see 100% eye to eye to the professor. Some issues you might see and the professor might not give you credit for the analysis. It really depends on if you think in a similar was as the professor. Sometimes professors really include 10 issues on the exam. You might see 15 issues. If you write down all 15 possible issues, then you have a higher chance of covering all the issues that the professor saw on the exam.

TBF my Property exam was weird as hell and the Ks exam will be relatively simplistic, hence 'w/r/t torts.' YMMV

BruceWayne wrote:

thexfactor wrote:

stratocophic wrote:

Columbia Law wrote:You get it. Don't be smart and all like "OMGZ MY PROFESSOR PUT A WORD LIMIT YOU'RE WRONGZ!!".

Standard issue spotter. No limit. If you didn't have over 5000-6000 words you have ZERO shot at an A/A-. Drop out now.

Haven't seen a model answer yet with =5k words, let alone >5k words. HTFH

Yeah you're probably right w/r/t/ torts though.

The problem is that you are not goin to see 100% eye to eye to the professor. Some issues you might see and the professor might not give you credit for the analysis. It really depends on if you think in a similar was as the professor. Sometimes professors really include 10 issues on the exam. You might see 15 issues. If you write down all 15 possible issues, then you have a higher chance of covering all the issues that the professor saw on the exam.

This is an excellent point that I was thinking about today--and really it's BS. I don't believe LS grading is completely arbitrary like some make it out to be, but it is far more arbitrary than the grading in a lot of other academic fields.

BTW this is how i type on my exams. run-on sentences, grammar mistakes, wrong words ... etc.. no regard for the english language.... lol
There is no time to proof read anything.

^
I mean how the hell else can you type that much in that period of time after reading long questions and fact patters? You essentially have to be pouring everything that is running through your mind onto the page without thinking.

Typing a lot of words in freak out "type type type" mode is counter-productive. You need to be thinking, not typing. Communicate points efficiently. If you start typing and you don't really know what you're saying, then its likely you are wasting time typing out something for which you wont get any points.

BruceWayne wrote: This is an excellent point that I was thinking about today--and really it's BS. I don't believe LS grading is completely arbitrary like some make it out to be, but it is far more arbitrary than the grading in a lot of other academic fields.

How I feel about the arbitrariness of law school grading will depend on what my final grades are

I typed 8000+ words for my 4 hour comparative law final. Kill me.

Doritos wrote:
How I feel about the arbitrariness of law school grading will depend on what my final grades are

QFT

180orbust wrote:Typing a lot of words in freak out "type type type" mode is counter-productive. You need to be thinking, not typing. Communicate points efficiently. If you start typing and you don't really know what you're saying, then its likely you are wasting time typing out something for which you wont get any points.

LOL OK bro. Would you rather have 5 darts to throw at the board or 8? It won't be "counter-productive." Maybe you won't get poinnts for everything you write but definitely not "counter-productive."

Columbia Law wrote:

180orbust wrote:Typing a lot of words in freak out "type type type" mode is counter-productive. You need to be thinking, not typing. Communicate points efficiently. If you start typing and you don't really know what you're saying, then its likely you are wasting time typing out something for which you wont get any points.

LOL OK bro. Would you rather have 5 darts to throw at the board or 8? It won't be "counter-productive." Maybe you won't get poinnts for everything you write but definitely not "counter-productive."

Does typing more, all things considered, generally give you a better chance at getting a higher grade? Sure.

Is it necessary or sufficient to getting you a better grade? No.

mistergoft wrote:

Columbia Law wrote:

180orbust wrote:Typing a lot of words in freak out "type type type" mode is counter-productive. You need to be thinking, not typing. Communicate points efficiently. If you start typing and you don't really know what you're saying, then its likely you are wasting time typing out something for which you wont get any points.

LOL OK bro. Would you rather have 5 darts to throw at the board or 8? It won't be "counter-productive." Maybe you won't get poinnts for everything you write but definitely not "counter-productive."

Does typing more, all things considered, generally give you a better chance at getting a higher grade? Sure.

Is it necessary or sufficient to getting you a better grade? No.

It's NEVER counter-productive to type more. Either you're stupid or you're not.

Sounds like a case of phsycological projection to me... slow typer?

Columbia Law wrote:

180orbust wrote:Typing a lot of words in freak out "type type type" mode is counter-productive. You need to be thinking, not typing. Communicate points efficiently. If you start typing and you don't really know what you're saying, then its likely you are wasting time typing out something for which you wont get any points.

LOL OK bro. Would you rather have 5 darts to throw at the board or 8? It won't be "counter-productive." Maybe you won't get poinnts for everything you write but definitely not "counter-productive."

Personally, I'd rather take 5 thought-out focused shots (which numbers do I already have? Which do I need to close on?) than 8 wild shots (some of which I waste by hitting numbers I've already closed on). Also, not only will the 8 shots not be as strategic due to lack of time, but they will no doubt be uglier i.e. completely miss the board / hit numbers on the board that don't help.


IMO though, it depends on professor.

Some professors like analysis.
Some use check lists.

Most are in between.

I don't think there is any one right answer.

Columbia Law wrote:

It's NEVER counter-productive to type more. Either you're stupid or you're not.

TITCR

10k words by a dumb as fuck person is going to be dumb as fuck

10k words by a smart person is probably going to be smart


10k smart words > 3k smart words > 10k dumb words > 3k dumb words

Columbia Law wrote:

mistergoft wrote:

Columbia Law wrote:

180orbust wrote:Typing a lot of words in freak out "type type type" mode is counter-productive. You need to be thinking, not typing. Communicate points efficiently. If you start typing and you don't really know what you're saying, then its likely you are wasting time typing out something for which you wont get any points.

LOL OK bro. Would you rather have 5 darts to throw at the board or 8? It won't be "counter-productive." Maybe you won't get poinnts for everything you write but definitely not "counter-productive."

Does typing more, all things considered, generally give you a better chance at getting a higher grade? Sure.

Is it necessary or sufficient to getting you a better grade? No.

It's NEVER counter-productive to type more. Either you're stupid or you're not.

You realize that my comment does not contradict the point you just made, right?

I said that it's not necessary or sufficient to write a novel, not that it would be counterproductive to do so.