in class exams v. take home exams

[RickLax.com]

So...my prof asks the class whether we want to do an in-class exam or a 72-hour take home exam and EVERYBODY in the class except for me and two other people votes for the take home exam.  What the hell? Why not get it done with in 3 hours? 

-RickLax

[oscarsonthepond]

Why do it with in 3 hours when you could do it with in 72?

[RickLax.com]

Why do it with in 3 hours when you could do it with in 72?

Well, sure, if I was getting paid by the hour...

[craven]

-sigh-  LSB, I really don't like being put in a position where I agree with you.  I don't even really want to engage you in a conversation, since I feel like everything you post will be a shill of some sort for either your blog or your

[derekj240]

For upper-division electives, I think the in class exams might be easier to score higher in because everyone would probably do well on the exam if they have 72 hours to complete it in the comfort of their own home while in-class exams might be easier to score higher in because you have to prep really hard to write a good exam during the "intense" 2 hours and so the curve would probably be easier. What do you guys think of this?

[RickLax.com]

-sigh-  LSB, I really don't like being put in a position where I agree with you.  I don't even really want to engage you in a conversation, since I feel like everything you post will be a shill of some sort for either your blog or your book.  But I digress.

If the same exam is going to be given, I'd go for the in-class exam, but that's because I'm betting that may ability to perform under the gun serves me better than everyone else's ability to agonize over the exam for 72 hours.  I know there are those who would devote way more time to it than I would, and I know I do all right on timed exams, so I'd take the 3 hour option.

On the other hand, most of your classmates figure that they can grind out the exam better than everyone else and run through it with a finer-toothed comb, and would rather do that than be forced to think, work, and write on the fly.  It all depends on what everyone thinks their strengths are.

Of course, only 50% of students are better (than average) at doing take-home exams...yet it seems like 95% of students think they're part of that 50%. 

[thorc954]

I think you should just submit a chapter of your book in lieu of the take home exam

jk.

"I would be pissed at having the take home exam, because it sounds terribly boring and like it would be significantly harder to distinguish yourself from the rest of the class.  Then again, you are a 3L so all your exams are virtually pass/fail anyway, so dont stress it."-Thorc954

I put it in quotes, so if you steal this for the book, it will be easier for you to avoid plagiarism.

[RickLax.com]

I think you should just submit a chapter of your book in lieu of the take home exam

jk.

"I would be pissed at having the take home exam, because it sounds terribly boring and like it would be significantly harder to distinguish yourself from the rest of the class.  Then again, you are a 3L so all your exams are virtually pass/fail anyway, so dont stress it."-Thorc954

I put it in quotes, so if you steal this for the book, it will be easier for you to avoid plagiarism.

Wait...I have pass/fail exams?  This is news.  I have 0, I'm pretty sure.  Is this common in other law schools?

-LawSchoolBlogger.com

[thorc954]

well, at my school, the 3L's that are going to get jobs already have them, so grades do not matter.

[RickLax.com]

well, at my school, the 3L's that are going to get jobs already have them, so grades do not matter.

Really?  The firms don't care if your grades dip? 
I remember all those horror stories in high school...kids, the stories went, would get into colleges, do awful in the Senior year, and then get their acceptances revoked.  Don't know anybody that actually happened to...but I remember the stories...