« on: January 28, 2008, 03:57:56 PM »
I think with regards to exam writing the most important thing is to learn how your prof. wants it to be written. I did a little research, asked questions, and showed them some practice answers to learn how they wanted it written. Not all profs. want it in IRAC form exactly. Only one of mine did.
I've only had experience with 4 law school exams so my expertise is limited but what I thought a lot of it was is common sense. If you bust your butt during the semester and know the law putting it together isn't that complicated. It's just a bunch of concepts. The legal analysis part is what I think got a lot of my friends. What I did (and it worked for me) is simply to use common sense. Explain the rule and then write how it applies. You know how it applies if you know the rule I think though sometimes it is such common sense people don't write it down. Then say how you think the court will come out. Keep it simple.
Another big thing is judgment. I am a very fast thinker and writer so I didn't have problems with time on the exams but if type slower I think it is helpful to start with the most important issues first and work your way down. This way you know you are getting the most points and bang for your time. I was told to do this because it helps the reader know that you can recognize what issues are the most important and what not.
Also, make an outline and try to keep your answers neat and logical. Make it as easy for the reader to read as possible.
Finally, LEEWs was great I guess. I did like the first 5 cd's and got tired of it but if you flip to spotting issues and the analysis part it was pretty helpful. Best of luck to you.