Thread by @ojsalinas

.@unc_law students and #lawstudents throughout the country (particularly 1Ls):

With #finalexams approaching, many of you may be thinking about working/updating a #lawschool outline. Many of you may also be looking for additional practice questions and final exam resources and tips. I provide some below.

Many of you may have access to outlines already (some you created, some provided by bar vendors, some online, and some circulated among students).

If you haven’t done so already, check to see if your law school gives you access to a variety of free, online law school study aids. Your #lawschoolacademicsupport professionals or librarians may be able to tell you if you have such access.

Remember that study aids can supplement your learning. They can help fill in the gaps that you may have, and they can provide opportunities for assessment.

And you need a lot of opportunities for assessment as you prepare for finals. Don’t spend all your time creating the “perfect” outline. Spend most of your time answering practice questions. Spend most of your time doing what you will be expected to do on your finals! Analysis!

If your professor provides you practice questions or old exams, definitely work on those questions and exams. If you don’t have access to practice questions or old exams, you can find a bunch of practice questions on study aids.

But the study aids don’t take the place of your professors, classes, or textbooks.

If a study aid or someone else’s outline discusses/explains a rule in a different way than your professor, you should absolutely try to learn the rule (and apply it on your final exam) the way your professor discusses/explains the rule.

Here are a few tips for creating/modifying an outline:

Try to write a “takeaway” for each of the cases that the professor asked you to read. This takeaway likely includes the black letter law that you or your professor pulled from each case, as well any significant facts that played into the court’s rationale for each case.

House these takeaways in a separate document (many of you will call this your "outline"), preferably using some method to categorize your thoughts.

Usually, the categorization should initially relate to major concepts that the professor has covered (i.e., Battery; Assault; False Imprisonment; Trespass to Chattels; Conversion; etc.).

But you can further sub-categorize based on subtopics within these major concepts (i.e., Battery > Intent element; Harmful/Offensive Touching element; etc.).

Your professor’s syllabus and your textbook table of contents can help you identify the major concepts and subtopics that might help in your categorization.

Consider adding some short blurbs/references to cases that help illustrate the takeaway. These blurbs should NOT be your entire case brief. Rather, each blurb is just some short reference that helps you remember a hypo that illustrates the takeaway.

You can always go back and review particular case briefs if you need a more detailed summary of a case.

But remember it is VERY LIKELY you will NOT be tested on a particular case that you read in class; rather, you will be tested on the rule and rationale that you extracted from the case. You will likely have to apply this rule and rationale to another factual scenario/hypo.

So don’t worry about memorizing each and every fact from every case you read for class! Law school finals are about applying the laws you picked up from those cases to DIFFERENT factual scenarios.

What students (particulary 1Ls) struggle with on exams is recognizing that issue spotting is critical for success on a final exam.

You can’t perform legal analysis on an issue that you didn’t spot. If you spot fewer issues than someone else in the class, that means that you will likely have less analysis than that student.

Fewer issues and less analysis result in fewer points. The fewer points you receive on an exam, the more likely that you will fall in the lower part of the mandatory curve.

All these “takeaways” that you are including in your outlines are potential issues that you may need to spot on an exam (or, at least, they are fair game issues that the professor likely expects you to know).

By creating your outline and critically thinking about the takeaways for each case that you read, you are becoming a better issue-spotter!

Once you spot an issue, you can then use the skills that you are developing in your legal writing classes to provide an effective analysis for that issue. For example, each issue you spot becomes a separate IRAC/C-RAC for you on your essay.

Remember to support your conclusions with analysis. Apply the law to the facts of the hypo for every issue you spot. Conclusory answers (conclusions w/out analysis) don’t get you a lot of points (if any).

How do you go about supporting your conclusions? The facts of the hypo are your friends! The facts are there to help nudge you (sometimes quite directly) to your analysis.

If you are stuck on the exam and don't know where to go, first take a couple of deep breaths. Then re-read the call of the question. Then revisit the facts—line by line.

If there are facts in the hypo that you have not talked about in your analysis, ask yourself if those facts in any way could potentially be related to something you covered in class.

Sometimes, these facts may relate to a counterargument. If so, you should still talk about these facts.

Also, pay attention to the number of questions on the exam and how much each question is valued (if provided). You want to spend more time on the questions that are more heavily valued (i.e., those questions that are worth more points).

Sometimes, a professor won't say how much a question is worth in terms of points. But the professor may say how much time to potentially spend on a question. That's a clue as to how much the question may be worth (a 1-hour question is likely worth more than a 30-minute one).

Also, make sure to finish the exam. If there are 3 questions on the exam & each is valued the same, don't just answer the first two questions.

You can max out on points for the first two questions, but you'll get no points for the third if you don't answer it.

Finally, make it easy for your prof. to read your exam. Aim for clear & concise writing. Short sentences. Paragraph breaks. Headings/subheadings. Walk the reader through your prediction by providing effective/complete legal analysis. And don't presume your reader knows anything.

Students often say something like, “Why should I explain what negligence is to my Torts prof.? They know what negligence is.” Or “Why should I explain why there is a breach of duty here? It's clear, & my prof. knows this.” Those students don't score well on the exam.

Lastly, remember that grades are external markers and don’t define you. I realize that grades are important to class rankings and jobs. But, because of the rigid law school curve, grades are often outside of your control.

You can’t control how well your classmates prepare for exams. You can’t control how many issues they spot. You can’t control how effective or robust their analysis is for each issue. You can’t control how well they handle the physical and mental stress that may accompany finals.

You can just try to control how you prepare and how you handle the stress of finals. Make sure to take care of yourself. Preparing for finals is not a 24-hour activity. You need rest and health.

You want to be in as good of a position physically and mentally so that you can show your professors what you know. And, it may not feel like it, but you know a lot.

I want you to leave the final exams feeling like, no matter what the extrinsic markers that may be placed upon you by your professors, that you tried your best and that you belong at your school.

I want you all to leave final exams feeling like you put yourself in a good position to succeed (however you define it). I hope these tips will help.