Constitutional Daily

Founding Principles

The Tenure Paradox - Robot pimp

Slap on the Wrist for "Non-Consensual Sex" - Lampshade, Esq.

Intelligence: The Gathering - Graphic and Gratuitous

Grads are the New Illegals - Robot Pimp

Meet Entitlement Eric - Robot Pimp

Wherein I Solve World Peace - Lampshade, Esq.

A Necessary Delusion - Shadow Hand

Do you even need to shave overhead? - Lawyerlite

LSAT Jenga - Publius Picasso

http://www.constitutionaldaily.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1573:legal-reasoning-redux-5&catid=38:there-and-never-back-again&Itemid=65

Time, Place, and Manner

...Should have some links here or something.

Banner

Here is a Dime, Use it to Phone a Friend

E-mail Print PDF

"The drug's dangerous," she said, "but it gives insight. When a Truthsayer's gifted by the drug, she can look many places in her memory — in her body's memory. We look down so many avenues of the past . . . but only feminine avenues." Her voice took on a note of sadness. "Yet, there's a place where no Truthsayer can see. We are repelled by it, terrorized. It is said a man will come one day and find in the gift of the drug his inward eye. He will look where we cannot — into both feminine and masculine pasts."

"Your Kwisatz Haderach?"

"Yes, the one who can be many places at once: the Kwisatz Haderach. Many men have tried the drug . . . so many, but none has succeeded."

"They tried and failed, all of them?"

"Oh, no." She shook her head. "They tried and died."

Reverend Mother Gaius Helen Mohiam and Paul Atreides, Dune, Frank Herbert


I cheated in law school.

It was easy, it was worth it, and looking back, I should have done it more.

The last exam of first semester was Civil Procedure. That was the tough class for my section. Every group of 1Ls has the “tough class.” The one with the professor everyone is intimidated by. The one they spend so much time studying for that they show up to other classes unprepared. In The Paper Chase, the tough class is Contracts with Kingsfield.

Civil Procedure with Samuel Issacharoff was our tough class. It wasn’t the “Kingsfield” of our 1L year though. Our equivalent of Kingsfield, the professor students have heard about before even applying to law school, was Arthur Miller, the professor on whom Perini is based in Scott Turow’s 1L. Arthur Miller also taught civil procedure, but to a different group of students, chosen at random.

Despite the tens of thousands of dollars you pay in tuition to your law school, it’s often a crapshoot like that. Some people will take a class from a legendary professor and gain stories to tell on interviews or around the water cooler later in life. Other people get the B squad. Not that NYU’s B squad was at all bad. But, “Yeah, Arthur Miller was teaching civ pro when I was there, …I had someone else though” isn’t really a compelling story. The Paper Chase without Kingsfield is not The Paper Chase.

Despite not being Arthur Miller, Issacharoff was still the terrifying professor for our section. That makes some people terrified of the exam. They’re scared of every exam, but really on edge about the tough professor’s test. With the curve though, it doesn’t really matter. A hard exam is hard for everyone. Your performance is relative to the performance of your classmates.

And, that’s why cheating works.

Many exams in law school use a variant of the closed book rule. Some allow you to bring in an index card with notes, others a full page. Civil procedure allowed us to bring in our entire copy of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

We weren’t told this until only a few weeks before the exam, which was a pretty bone headed move for a professor to make. Naturally, being good, diligent law students, almost everyone had taken some sort of notes in their copy of the FRCP. We were told those notes did not have to be removed, but we were not to write more notes in our book. No other notes would be allowed in the exam. It was practically an invitation to cheat.

In law school, and in pretty much every other context, I am terrible with names. I can do well enough with remembering the nuances of arguments and ideas, but ask me what case it came from, and I haven’t a clue. “The one about the stove,” doesn’t cut it on a law school exam.

So, I did what you might expect from any law student in a competitive, high-stress environment. I cheated. I went through the rules in the FRCP, and next to the ones we had covered in class, I jotted down the names of the relevant cases.

The professor had given us model answers to past exams. The potential to cheat was far greater than what I did. How easy it would have been to copy the outline of a model answer into the blank inside of the back cover. There was so much white space in that book that went unused.

I know that professors and many students like to think that few students cheat, and that cheating doesn’t really improve performance on the exam. After all, the exam tests concepts and analysis, and that’s not something you can cheat on. You need a refined analytical mind, not notes you snuck into class with you.

Those people are wrong.

There was going to be an Erie Doctrine question on the exam, no doubt. If you don’t think a student would be benefitted by a roadmap to the answer, a guide to the issues that much be addressed and the order to tackle them, then you’re a fool.

Cheating, at least this sort of cheating, is not designed to take you from a B- to an A-. It is designed to help you at the margins. An hour that would have been spent memorizing case names turns into an hour studying something else, or studying for another class, or sleeping. It speeds you along by a minute or two during the exam. It is insurance against a mistake or memory lapse, and it lets you relax a bit and more effectively deal with the meat of the test.

Law schools claim that their mission is to teach students to think like lawyers. But, by looking at the way exams are handled, it’s clear that the professors themselves lack this ability.

Take home exams are a recipe for disaster, and you can rest assured study groups will be working on exams together. If the class is big enough, being in competition with each other won’t prevent collaboration; there are enough As to go around for your entire group. Closed book, or limited note exams invite students to sneak in more notes. Just print it out really tiny on a piece of paper, put the paper in your pocket, halfway through the exam, when you’ve seen what issues you need a refreshed on, you go to the bathroom, sit in a stall, and read.

If law professors practiced law the same way they give exams, they would be writing contracts where breach comes with a reward of liquidated damages. At trial, cross examinations would begin with “Isn’t it the case that everything you said on direct examination is true?”

The cynics will say that the people who cheated are the ones who learned to think like lawyers. That might be true. Some lawyers do cheat, others have hard line ethical principles they will not cross. But, no one can honestly say that a good lawyer creates clear incentives for the opposing party to cheat without recourse.

I got a B+ in Civil Procedure. A lot of students get a B+. It’s not an extraordinary grade, but it’s in the top half. Maybe I would have gotten a B+ without cheating, maybe not. I’ll never know. But, one thing I will know is that I did not get a B.


A beginning is the time for taking the most delicate care that the balances are correct.

Princess Irulan, Dune, Frank Herbert

[Read more from BL1Y]


blog comments powered by Disqus

Philadelphia Lawyer, Unfiltered

The finest blend of analysis, advice, and fury on the internet. Sour mash, oak barrel aged, published at cask strength.

 


Most Recent Article:

In Defense of Risk (Happy Fourth of July)


All Articles from The Philadelphia Lawyer

Author Profile

The Robot Pimp

An in depth look at the emerging intersection of law, behavioral economics, and robots.


Most Recent Article:

The Tenure Paradox


All Articles from The Robot Pimp

Author Profile

Practice Makes Putrid

Legal practice would be all rainbows and buttercups, if it weren't for the clients, and opposing counsel, and co-counsel, and judges, and the law.


Most Recent Article:

Eat Mor Fiv Freedums


All Articles from The Namby Pamby

Author Profile

Gin and Glannon's

As Shadow Hand suffers through law school, the rest of us get a little Schadenfreude.


Most Recent Article:

I Just Work Here


All Articles From Shadow Hand

Author Profile

Irresistible Impulse

Dr. Rob Dobrenski's daring expedition into the psychology of lawyers and the law. (Not a substitute for a life well lived.)


Most Recent Article:

You're Not a Failure, You're a Narcissist


All Articles from Dr. Rob

Author Profile

Graphic and Gratuitous

Sometimes cartoons are the highest form of communication. Those times are known as "most of the time."


Most Recent Cartoons:

Intelligence: The Gathering


All Cartoons

There And Never Back Again

Defunct Big Law attorney BL1Y shares his misadventures as a writer who accidentally went to law school.

 


Most Recent Article:

JD vs MFA


All Articles from BL1Y

Author Profile

Lampshade, Esquire

We're dealing with some technical difficulties here. Hold up a minute.


All Articles From Lampshade, Esq.

Staff Infections

News, humor, and other non-billables from our underpaid, uncredited, unsexy staff.

 


News Articles

Smaller News Bits

Large Numbers of Law

Mixed Bag of Lawesome

Reviews

Scofflaw Multistate Bar Review

Lawyerlite