Exam Prep Strategies Forum

[theycallmefoes]

A few questions:
1. What's TCR (if one exists) with respect to how early one should start PTing? It seems like I've seen a decent amount of variation in answers to this question.
2. Do you match specific PT questions to topics covered in class (i.e., after reviewing a certain topic, find a corresponding PT question that tests that knowledge)? Or is finding corresponding questions just unlikely/impractical?
3. How many PTs do you actually take? In all the threads, I don't think I've seen anything more specific than something along the lines of "PT a lot."
4. If you only have 1 or 2 PTs for a class, do you just find as many PTs as you can from other law schools?
5. Do you repeat PTs (i.e., take the same PT more than once)?
6. What resources do you use to prepare for MC questions?
7. While this will obviously vary depending on the school, in general, how willing have your professors been to look over your PTs?

Well, that ended up being longer than I'd planned. Oops. Thanks in advance!

[randomstudent]

A few questions:
1. What's TCR (if one exists) with respect to how early one should start PTing? It seems like I've seen a decent amount of variation in answers to this question.
2. Do you match specific PT questions to topics covered in class (i.e., after reviewing a certain topic, find a corresponding PT question that tests that knowledge)? Or is finding corresponding questions just unlikely/impractical?
3. How many PTs do you actually take? In all the threads, I don't think I've seen anything more specific than something along the lines of "PT a lot."
4. If you only have 1 or 2 PTs for a class, do you just find as many PTs as you can from other law schools?
5. Do you repeat PTs (i.e., take the same PT more than once)?
6. What resources do you use to prepare for MC questions?
7. While this will obviously vary depending on the school, in general, how willing have your professors been to look over your PTs?

Well, that ended up being longer than I'd planned. Oops. Thanks in advance!

1. I don't know if there's one correct response, but I usually started PTing in earnest after classes ended, although during the semester, I might do one or two PTs if the professor suggested it.
2. If you're doing a ton of PTs, yeah, try to cover a variety of topics. Whether or not this is practical depends on the professor. Often, the professor will only give you one or two PTs, so you end up just doing everything s/he gives you.
3. Doing 1-4 PTs per subject is pretty common, but if you want, you can do anywhere from 0-20 PTs before the exam. If you don't want to do a full-write up a particular PT, you can just issue spot and outline it and then compare outlines with a friend.
4. You can.
5. You can.
6. Old retired MC Qs from your prof or bar prep Qs from PMBR, Finz, BarBri, etc.
7. Three or four of my six professors who had essay-based exams volunteered to look over (or at least discuss) our PTs before finals. Two of these professors actively encouraged us to submit at least one PT to him/her before finals.

[theycallmefoes]

1. I don't know if there's one correct response, but I usually started PTing in earnest after classes ended, although during the semester, I might do one or two PTs if the professor suggested it.
2. If you're doing a ton of PTs, yeah, try to cover a variety of topics. Whether or not this is practical depends on the professor. Often, the professor will only give you one or two PTs, so you end up just doing everything s/he gives you.
3. Doing 1-4 PTs per subject is pretty common, but if you want, you can do anywhere from 0-20 PTs before the exam. If you don't want to do a full-write up a particular PT, you can just issue spot and outline it and then compare outlines with a friend.
4. You can.
5. You can.
6. Old retired MC Qs from your prof or bar prep Qs from PMBR, Finz, BarBri, etc.
7. Three or four of my six professors who had essay-based exams volunteered to look over (or at least discuss) our PTs before finals. Two of these professors actively encouraged us to submit at least one PT to him/her before finals.

Thanks for the response!

A few more questions for you and others (I'd love to get some more feedback):

1. Reiterating #5 from above - Have any of you found repeating PTs to be helpful? Is it like prepping for LGs, where doing some of the same games over and over improves your understanding/skill (in this case, issue-spotting/analytical ability and familiarity with fact patterns)?

2. How do you handle racehorse issue-spotters where a CALI-worthy grade is likely 7k or (substantially) more?
a. Do you start at the beginning and tackle the issues in the order they're presented? Or do you identify the major issues first and make sure to analyze the shit out of them before doing more cursory analysis for the minor issues?
b. Do you do more in-depth analysis at the beginning of the exam and then cut it down later in favor of spotting more issues? Or is it preferable to spot fewer issues, but give stellar analysis on the ones you did identify?
c. Should I maybe make a complete list of every issue first and then go back and apply the law to the facts?
I'm just really nervous about how to approach those exams where it is actually physically impossible to hit and analyze every issue (which, from what I've read, appears to be the case for many law school exams).

3. On the flip side, how do you deal with exams that have really tight word limits? (This may be difficult to answer, since it likely depends on the course and the type of question being asked - regardless, any insight would be helpful.)
Thanks!

[randomstudent]

A few more questions for you and others (I'd love to get some more feedback):

1. Reiterating #5 from above - Have any of you found repeating PTs to be helpful? Is it like prepping for LGs, where doing some of the same games over and over improves your understanding/skill (in this case, issue-spotting/analytical ability and familiarity with fact patterns)?

2. How do you handle "racehorse" issue-spotters where a CALI-worthy grade is likely 7k or (substantially) more?
a. Do you start at the beginning and tackle the issues in the order they're presented? Or do you identify the major issues first and make sure to analyze the shit out of them before doing more cursory analysis for the minor issues?
b. Do you do more in-depth analysis at the beginning of the exam and then cut it down later in favor of spotting more issues? Or is it preferable to spot fewer issues, but give stellar analysis on the ones you did identify?
c. Should I maybe make a complete list of every issue first and then go back and apply the law to the facts?
I'm just really nervous about how to approach those exams where it is actually physically impossible to hit and analyze every issue (which, from what I've read, appears to be the case for many law school exams).

3. On the flip side, how do you deal with exams that have really tight word limits? (This may be difficult to answer, since it likely depends on the course and the type of question being asked - regardless, any insight would be helpful.)
Thanks!

1. I'll let other people give their thoughts on this.

2. More words is not always better, even on a racehorse exam. I've seen cases where two answers on a particular sub-issue got the same number of points from the same professor even though one answer was half the length of the other. If you run into a racehorse exam, I would outline the whole exam first and then just try to address each issue as concisely as possible. If you budget your time wisely, it should be possible (though admittedly not easy) to do a quick analysis of every issue you spot.

3. A lot of the time, when your exam has a word limit, it's a take-home exam, and you'll have a full day to turn it in. Those are not too bad because you can write out your answer in full and then go back and cut it down to the word limit. But if you have a racehorse exam with a word limit...that's tough. I had one of these this last semester, and it was not fun, to say the least. I think the best thing you can do with these exams is just to practice writing concisely before the actual exam. The more comfortable you can get with addressing each issue in as few words as possible, the better you'll be able to tackle the actual exam without having to waste valuable time going back and cutting down your answers to fit the word limit.