Will it hurt me to write down all rules at start of test? Forum

[itstime]

I am wanting to write down my issue checklist with rules at the start of the 4 hour crim law test but wonder if that will take to much time? I imagine I can do it in 15 minutes I worry I'll get things mixed up if I don't.

I don't want to run out of time

Thoughts?

[ran12]

I am wanting to write down my issue checklist with rules at the start of the 4 hour crim law test but wonder if that will take to much time? I imagine I can do it in 15 minutes I worry I'll get things mixed up if I don't.

I don't want to run out of time

Thoughts?

If it'll help you stay organized then it's prob a good idea. On tests like these, people run out of time b/c their thoughts aren't as well organized as they would like so they're scrambling to get things going.

[quiver]

I'm not sure I'm understanding your OP correctly but I think you're saying to write down all of the issues with rules?

I don't think that's the best idea. Writing down your issue checklist is most definitely helpful (and something I did for every closed-book exam) but writing out the rule for everything seems like it would take way too much time relative to its usefulness. I would just memorize all the rules and write down your issue checklist.

[LAWYER2]

I felt like I spent too much time writing the rules and not enough time writing my analysis on my last exam

[Big Shrimpin]

I am wanting to write down my issue checklist with rules at the start of the 4 hour crim law test but wonder if that will take to much time? I imagine I can do it in 15 minutes I worry I'll get things mixed up if I don't.

I don't want to run out of time

Thoughts?

Might depend on the prof, but for the most part, this is probably a horrible waste of time. I can't think of one exam in the past 4 semesters that I've done this for, nor have I ever heard of someone doing anything similar with positive results.

A good exam, especially a thick issue-spotter, doesn't mechanically break-out rules from application to and analysis of the facts. You apply the rules as you find the facts, which limits the urge to invent facts and thereby nets you more points. Moreover, you might not use every rule as pronounced in class. Thus, you'll probably do better if you do rule application and analysis as you rip through the facts, following forks, arguments, and counter-arguments along the way. If you come to another set of facts that implicates using a rule from before, all you have to do is note the fact you previously explained a rule, then just apply those facts accordingly.

[abudaba]

yes it will hurt you to arbitrarily write down rules for 15 minutes.

I sometimes quickly scribbled down acronyms to act as my issue checklist for closed book exams. Never took more than a minute. Taking the minute may be worth it (if it puts your mind at ease), but 15 minutes is far too much time. Take a minute to make a quick checklist if you must, the other 239 minutes should be focused exclusively on getting points.

[leobowski]

Is it closed book? If so, this might help.

[shepdawg]

Read the hypo, then outline the rules that apply. For classes like property and torts, the exam will cover 10-30% of what you learned in class.

[LAWYER2]

Read the hypo, then outline the rules that apply. For classes like property and torts, the exam will cover 10-30% of what you learned in class.

THIS

[traehekat]

If your "checklist" takes 15 minutes to write down, you are doing it wrong. Either cut some stuff out, or use more acronyms. I do think it's a good idea to use some form of checklist for closed book exams, but it really shouldn't take more than 5-7 minutes to write down.