"Plan? What Plan?" - How Law Students Approach Assessment

by

Jeff Giddings

Faculty of Law, Griffith University

 

Introduction

I convene the compulsory year-length subject Criminal Law and Procedure offered at Griffith Law School. Each year, I run review classes for the students prior to the mid-year and final exams.1 In 1997, it became very clear prior to the final review class that many students still lacked confidence in relation to answering hypothetical questions in exams. I therefore provided students with a 'blueprint' for answering such questions. Some students said that these review classes were the first time the issue of how to approach hypotheticals had been addressed during their law studies at Griffith. It concerned me that students had either not been given advice on assessment or had forgotten the advice received. Work on this project has made it clear that students were given advice on these issues early in their degree but had apparently forgotten this.

It seemed that it would be valuable to provide students with a resource which they could use throughout their studies. A grant was obtained from the Law School's Teaching and Learning Excellence Committee to develop such a resource. Focus groups were conducted with students from each year of the undergraduate program. Each focus group involved around 10 students and ran for between 11/2 and 2 hours. I was assisted in conducting the focus groups by a final year student, Mitchell O'Brien.

Each focus group began with discussion related to general issues regarding assessment preferences, strategies used, the value of feedback and the use of study groups. Students then discussed issues related to 3 particular forms of assessment; assignments, exams and oral advocacy exercises.

While students spoke openly about their approaches to assessment, they clearly also wanted to provide feedback on the efforts of the academic staff in relation to assessment.

 

Existing Resources in This Area

While there are sources of advice available to law students regarding how to approach assessment items2, we found such resources could have more effective if they had provided specific practical advice. It was clear that there were some students in need of accessible information regarding assessment.

Griffith law students doing the first year foundation subject, Law and Legal Obligations make use of a Butterworths text, Laying Down the Law.3 This 300 page book covers a wide range of legal issues. While the chapter on the citation of sources is 15 pages in length, the chapter on study and exam skills is only 9 pages and is right at the back of the book. This chapter on study and exam skills poses a series of important questions but does not go on to try and answer them. By contrast, Krever's Mastering Law Studies and Law Exam Techniques4 focuses heavily on exams and is 280 pages long. Griffith Law School is committed to continuing assessment and so needs to also provide students with advice on other assessment items.5

 

What the Students Told Us

General Comments
It became clear that many students do not plan their approach to either particular assessment items or their total assessment responsibilities. A series of students indicated that even though they knew their marks would benefit from taking a more strategic approach to assessment tasks, they continued to rely on the 'last minute panic'. This was said to be caused mainly by the range of other commitments which students must juggle.

Students told us that they learnt what works with assessment by 'trial and error' as well as by asking other students what they did. Students in the early years of the program also relied heavily on the approaches they used at secondary school. Feedback from markers was seen as very important in terms of refining their approach. Students looked to their small group teachers as the main source of feedback and said that small groups were the best venue for refining their understanding of issues and for preparing for assessment items. Students indicated that it is vital for them to receive their assessment and feedback in a timely manner, enabling them to address any issues when completing future assessment tasks. Marking criteria sheets and feedback sheets were suggested as a means through which lecturers may be able to limit the amount of time required to provide constructive criticism and feedback to large groups of students.

Many students could see the value of seeking guidance from lecturers as to what was expected for any given piece of assessment. Despite this recognition, there were few students who had taken the next step of actually approaching their lecturers on a regular basis. Students stated that in the early years of their studies they lacked the confidence to speak to their lecturers. Students suggested that they would only go and speak to lecturers who they felt they knew well.

Students in later years make extensive use of study groups whereas early year students preferred studying on their own. It was generally thought that study groups were more useful in dealing with substantive legal problems, with an informal approach being the most conducive for achieving progress. It was further suggested that the law school could facilitate better group work by making it clearer to students what the school's plagiarism policy is, and what types of group work would breach that policy.

The move towards study groups in later years may be a result of 2 factors; the increasing familiarity amongst students and the increased workload. Students stated that they were wary of working with people they did not know well as there was no way of knowing the standard of that person's work. There was agreement that 3 or 4 people was the most efficient size for such study groups.

While there were some differences of opinion, it was clear that assignments were the preferred form of assessment for most students. Exams, particularly those involving hypothetical fact scenarios, were the least popular form of assessment. The key concern students had with hypotheticals was that they never received feedback on their performance and so were not able to alter their approach for future exercises. Some students stated that they enjoyed the 'realism' of hypotheticals.6

Approaching Exams
Students said that in preparation for exams, they spent considerable time collating their materials and stressed the importance of allowing sufficient time for this process. Students would then go through past exams and small group questions on the day before the exam. Flow charts were noted as being an excellent preparation tool.

Time allocation in exams is obviously an important issue for students. While all of the focus group participants recognised the importance of time management in exams, many indicated that they still found themselves running over time on some questions. They said they found it extremely difficult to only partially answer a question and so 'borrowed' time allocated for other questions. Take-home exams were regarded as better assessment pieces because they enable people to show their actual knowledge, not just how much they can write down in the time specified.

It was agreed that students need to make the best possible use of reading and perusal time allocated for an exam. Perusal time was used to separate out the issues for all the questions rather than fully planning the answer to one question. It was suggested that students need to have been burnt once previously by not utilising perusal effectively for them to learn how to use this time more effectively. The third and fourth year focus groups highlighted a problem with the students apparently prioritising their first exam over all other exams, quite possibly to the detriment of their performance in remaining exams.

As a student, I was always told that the easiest marks to get for any exam question were the first 50%. I was surprised that many of the students had not received similar advice. It may be useful to provide students with an example to illustrate this point. Contrast the positions of the following 2 students, A & B, who complete a 2 hour exam with 4 questions, each worth 25 marks. (30 minutes per question)

Student A Student B
Spends extra time on the 2 questions they feel most comfortable with and do better on those but then have less time for the remaining 2 questions. Spends 30 minutes on each question and provides a point form summary where they cannot complete their answer.
Q1 (40 minutes) 80%
Q2 (40 minutes) 80%
Q3 (20 minutes) 45%
Q4 (20 minutes) 40%
Average             61.25%		 Q1 (30 minutes) 70%
Q2 (30 minutes) 70%
Q3 (30 minutes) 65%
Q4 (30 minutes) 60%
Average             66.25%

Students also made a range of suggestions for those setting and marking exams. When drafting exam problems lecturers should keep the names to A, B & C and limit the number of plaintiffs. The facts need to be kept simple and students should not have to track family trees of parties in an exam hypothetical. It was clear that it was faster to use dot points rather than paragraphs. Furthermore, sessional teachers involved in marking assessment need to be effectively briefed as to what is the purpose of the assessment and the level and content of knowledge expected of students.

Approaching Assignments
Students do not appear to plan out the amount of time they will spend on an assignment. Many laughed when I asked whether they plan ahead in relation to how much time they should allocate to researching and then writing any given assignment. Many students stated that they often spend too much time researching and not enough writing. Some students stated that they continue researching right up until they submit their assignments. Students also (understandably) spend more time researching assignments related to areas of law which they find interesting.

The general practice is that students continue researching until they feel they have enough articles to adequately address the topic. Despite being aware that they spend too much time researching, students are also conscious that too much research can make answering the question more confusing. Other students were of the opinion that writing last minute essays with less research enabled them to complete a simpler, clearer albeit more superficial essay.

Students often spent considerable time developing an appropriate structure for assignments. The general trend seemed to be that students would hammer out their introduction first as a means of mapping out the argument they would then develop throughout their paper. It was recognised that structure was very important, however, any such structure needs to be flexible enough to incorporate new ideas and arguments. One student suggested that a contents page can be an excellent tool for ensuring that an assignment progresses logically.

I was again surprised that students tended not to include in their introduction a justification of the approach they were going to take. I always encourage students to provide such a justification as it reduces the potential for mismatches between the assumptions made by the student and the marker. Later year focus groups advised that students need to be creative when writing an essay; students should not hesitate to express an idea so long as can be justified. From experience creative arguments using other resources were said to optimise marks for students.

The focus groups sounded a warning as to how long it can take to research an assignment. Given the demands on library resources, it is important to start work sooner rather than later. 'The later you leave it, the more likely that none of the books will be there.' The most commonly suggested strategy was to plan ahead, research ahead of time and then wait until closer to the due date to actually write the assessment piece.

In relation to sources of information, students tend to rely on the tried but true method of locating journal articles and following up references contained in footnotes and any bibliography. Students would normally start with general CD Rom searches and then only use other search mechanisms for a specific purpose or if they were tracking down a particular article.

Approaching Moots and Advocacy Exercises
Students felt they had to be more prepared for advocacy exercises such as moots than for any other assessment item. To quote one focus group, 'Students must be incredibly prepared'. Moots are popular and generally regarded as a good indicator of understanding because students are forced to think on their feet. This heightened awareness of the need to prepare exhaustively is clearly felt by our Legal Clinic students who, as part of the semester-length placement with Caxton Legal Centre, appear on behalf of a legal centre client before the Brisbane Magistrates Court. Students stressed that the preparation required for moots must be reflected in the percentage weight given to these assessment items.

One group of students particularly appreciated the multi-stage advocacy exercise completed in the elective subject, Revenue Law.7 This resource-intensive exercise was developed with the support of a teaching grant but has not been continued in subsequent offerings of Revenue Law.

Students said that videos were a very valuable learning tool in this area. When preparing for a moot it was said to be better to work in a group, testing out arguments and discussing issues.

Student advocates must respond to the questions posed by 'the judge'. Students should be encouraged to ask the judge to clarify or rephrase a question if the point of a question is unclear. Students should not feel panicked into answering questions immediately, as that can lead to more trouble than pausing. Students should take the opportunity to think about their answer for a moment.

 

Conclusion

I have found this to be an interesting project. While there will always be divergent views amongst students as to the best way to approach assessment, there is clearly some information (suggestions, advice, hints - all it what you like) which can be usefully provided to students starting at law school. The project has also raised a series of issues for staff of the law school to further consider.

The process of developing the assessment resource is ongoing. Once a draft of the resource is developed, it will then be 'road tested' with both students and law school staff. The final product will be made available to students at the beginning of 1999.

 

I would appreciate any feedback you have on the project and this paper. My contact details are:

Jeff Giddings
Law School
Griffith University
Nathan 4111

(07) 3875 6479

 

Footnotes

  1. Assessment for the subject involves a major assignment (25%), mid-year exam (25%), Magistrates Court visit and report (20%) and a final exam (30%).

  2. Krever provides a comprehensive list of such sources. See R. Krever, Mastering Law Studies and Law Exam Techniques (1995) 3rd ed., Butterworths, Sydney, 278-280.

  3. G. Morris et al, Laying Down the Law (1996) 4th ed., Butterworths, Sydney

  4. Krever, Above, note 3.

  5. Other sources of advice to law students include the classic by Glanville Williams, Learning the Law (1982) 11th ed, Stevens, London, S. A. Fraser, How to Study Law (1993) Law Book, Sydney & P. Keyzer, Legal Problem Solving: A Guide For Law Students, (1994) Butterworths, Sydney.

  6. The importance of planning realistic simulations is identified by Feinman, 'Simulations: An Introduction', (1995) 45 (4) Journal Of Legal Education, 469

  7. For an account of this exercise, see M. Keyes & M. Whincop, 'The Moot Reconceived: Some Theory and Evidence on Legal Skills' (1997) 8 (1) Legal Education Review 1, 24-39.

 

Conference Entry Page About the Conference Abstracts Conference Program

TEDI Home About Assessment UQ Home

This site built on a Macintosh using Dreamweaver.. Last modified 20/1/99; 10:14:17 AM.