Top Law Schools

Does it ever make sense to go into a test without studying the material much beforehand? My professor implies (and his tests bear out) that he is not going to be testing the minutiae of the subject, he is going to be testing our ability to make different types of arguments for either side. I started going over the material and outlining thoroughly is going to be a bitch and a half; and I won't be able to take practice tests.

I know the basics of the subjects so I think I'll spot at least the general issues, and there's an index in the book. The test is open book. I can use an old outline, or outline very sketchily, and then take a lot of practice tests, and I'm not gonna lie, study other subjects. What is the flaw in my grand plan?

I think your username says it all

c3pO4 wrote:I think your username says it all

Clever. I hadn't thought of that. I had thought delusional was a wonderful thing, but I just now looked it up and apparently it means... delusional. Crap.

To spot issues, you really need to know the law and you will arguing about. Like, if you don't know what the elements of battery are, then your arguments are going to be pretty crappy. "A hit him, so it was a battery. B didn't mean to, so that may be a defense."

Outlining in itself isn't necessary. People just do it because it forces them to study and learn the law. If you want to learn it another way, that's kewl. But you really should do some practice tests to get a feel for arguing the elements of a particular thing. It helps you hone and sharpen them by applying it.

shock259 wrote:To spot issues, you really need to know the law and you will arguing about. Like, if you don't know what the elements of battery are, then your arguments are going to be pretty crappy. "A hit him, so it was a battery. B didn't mean to, so that may be a defense."

Outlining in itself isn't necessary. People just do it because it forces them to study and learn the law. If you want to learn it another way, that's kewl. But you really should do some practice tests to get a feel for arguing the elements of a particular thing. It helps you hone and sharpen them by applying it.

Yeah, I'm doing practice tests. My question really was whether it makes sense to skew the balance heavily in favor of practice tests over doctrine, since the test is not likely to be very doctrine-heavy.