Tips on approaching an open ended policy question? Forum
-
Anomaly
- Posts: 151
- Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 7:55 pm
Tips on approaching an open ended policy question?
Something like "Is our legal system fair?"
-
JCougar
- Posts: 3216
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:47 pm
Re: Tips on approaching an open ended policy question?
These are always the stupidest questions.
There's basically two strategies you should use: one is to virtually copy down onto your exam paper basically everything that's on your outline even remotely related to the subject. The more stuff you talk about, the more points you get, even if it makes little practical sense or is just totally stupid.
The second is to massively stroke your professor's ego. Even on issue spotters, most students spot all the issues, so the higher grades are determined by outline copying/ego stroking. But policy questions have even less of an objective element to them. Basically whoever's essay causes the most dopamine release in the professor's brain gets the highest score and gets biglaw. So look up your professor's policy papers and law review articles, etc. to get a sense of their worldview, and then basically recopy your outline all the while finding ways to twist your essay into stroking their ego. And enjoy your guaranteed success.
And don't ask any questions about why this is an absolutely stupid method of differentiating the good lawyers from the bad lawyers basically before anyone has even set foot in a law firm. If you criticize the current system, you must be a loser.
There's basically two strategies you should use: one is to virtually copy down onto your exam paper basically everything that's on your outline even remotely related to the subject. The more stuff you talk about, the more points you get, even if it makes little practical sense or is just totally stupid.
The second is to massively stroke your professor's ego. Even on issue spotters, most students spot all the issues, so the higher grades are determined by outline copying/ego stroking. But policy questions have even less of an objective element to them. Basically whoever's essay causes the most dopamine release in the professor's brain gets the highest score and gets biglaw. So look up your professor's policy papers and law review articles, etc. to get a sense of their worldview, and then basically recopy your outline all the while finding ways to twist your essay into stroking their ego. And enjoy your guaranteed success.
And don't ask any questions about why this is an absolutely stupid method of differentiating the good lawyers from the bad lawyers basically before anyone has even set foot in a law firm. If you criticize the current system, you must be a loser.
