2018 February CA Bar

supa_mitsu
Posts: 46
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 7:27 pm

Re: 2018 February CA Bar

Postby supa_mitsu » Fri Jan 12, 2018 7:31 pm

Anyone has tips on how to be faster at the PTs? It consistently takes me over an hour just to go through the library and write down the rules...

FinallyPassedTheBar
Posts: 286
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2015 5:27 am

Re: 2018 February CA Bar

Postby FinallyPassedTheBar » Fri Jan 12, 2018 8:22 pm

supa_mitsu wrote:Anyone has tips on how to be faster at the PTs? It consistently takes me over an hour just to go through the library and write down the rules...



Are you practicing with the newer 90 minute format PT or the older 180 minute PT?

User avatar
a male human
Posts: 1891
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: 2018 February CA Bar

Postby a male human » Fri Jan 12, 2018 8:26 pm

supa_mitsu wrote:Anyone has tips on how to be faster at the PTs? It consistently takes me over an hour just to go through the library and write down the rules...

What do you think is slowing you down? Are you getting lost in the procedural history of the case(s)? Can't figure out what the rules are?

supa_mitsu
Posts: 46
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 7:27 pm

Re: 2018 February CA Bar

Postby supa_mitsu » Fri Jan 12, 2018 9:06 pm

I'm practicing with the 90-minute MPTs on the GA website (thanks for the resource a male human, by the way). I'm keeping track of how long it takes to do what and definitely finding the rule in the library and typing it down takes me the most time. A total of around 2h15m for the whole PT. I'm already planning on stealing 10 minutes to each of the afternoon essays (to give the PT a total of 1h50m), but I'm still far from finishing in 1h50m.

This is my approach: I read the task memo and write down the issue/introduction, conclusion and all the formatting (8m), then I read the library and underline the rules (1h20m-1h30m; it's usually a TON of stuff), then I underline relevant facts in the library and categorize them (20m), then I write them down (15-20m). By the way, I noticed that the selected answers of the GA MPTs really don't have long analysis; most of those consist in rule statement (which, again, is a TON of stuff to find and write down). How are you guys able to cut down times? am I doing something obviously wrong?

User avatar
a male human
Posts: 1891
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: 2018 February CA Bar

Postby a male human » Fri Jan 12, 2018 10:23 pm

Pulling out the rules was usually the easiest part for me because I manually briefed every case I read in law school like a dumbass.

I want to say that if pulling the rules is giving you the most trouble, just practice that to keep it under 30 min. There are plenty of MPTs to do, so you won't have to worry too much about running out.

The rules are generally principles that apply to the case. Sometimes they're neatly numbered.

Even if you underline whatever looks like the rules, you probably don't need all of it. I like to have a separate outline that notes which ones I'm going to need to answer the question. When you "write them down" (on screen?), you'll have to pick the most pertinent ones... but if you have some extra ones floating in your answer, whatever. Analyze using some relevant facts (you probably won't use all of them) and get to a reasonable conclusion using the rules/principles.

Like with an essay, you'll want to IRAC and use clear headings for each issue or sub-issue (associated with any rule elements).

One last thing. You don't have to feel weird about "plagiarizing" from the assignment. Those words are there for you to use, like a real case. Just copy the shit out of the rules you find and slap some quotes around them. That should save you some time and mental effort. Don't try to be creative and reinterpret what's plainly there.

supa_mitsu
Posts: 46
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 7:27 pm

Re: 2018 February CA Bar

Postby supa_mitsu » Fri Jan 12, 2018 11:19 pm

From what you wrote, my problem is probably that I find too many rules, subrules and standards that are not that relevant. I'll just try to get the main rules next time and try to keep it faster. Also, it doesn't help that I don't have an American JD (so I'm fairly new to doing all this stuff) so I probably just have to keep practicing and practicing. Hopefully for less than the duration of a whole JD! Thanks for the input.

bacillusanthracis
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2015 1:30 am

Re: 2018 February CA Bar

Postby bacillusanthracis » Sat Jan 13, 2018 1:06 am

supa_mitsu wrote:From what you wrote, my problem is probably that I find too many rules, subrules and standards that are not that relevant. I'll just try to get the main rules next time and try to keep it faster. Also, it doesn't help that I don't have an American JD (so I'm fairly new to doing all this stuff) so I probably just have to keep practicing and practicing. Hopefully for less than the duration of a whole JD! Thanks for the input.


As far as that goes, don't worry too much. If you're familiar with legal research, you can do a PT. It's all about following directions. So follow them as closely as possible. Yeah, there's more to it than that, but that's base upon which you want to build.

Also, I'll recommend a book for you. It deals with the old 3 hour format, but that doesn't matter. It gives you a step by step approach that's exactly applicable to the new PT.

https://www.amazon.com/California-Perfo ... mance+test

helpappreciated
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2015 6:43 pm

Re: 2018 February CA Bar

Postby helpappreciated » Sat Jan 13, 2018 1:28 am

Anyone have any experience using the Emmanuel S&T part 2 or the FINZ version? (I have part 1.) A male human, I've read your review of part 2, but what about FINZ?

User avatar
a male human
Posts: 1891
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: 2018 February CA Bar

Postby a male human » Sat Jan 13, 2018 2:52 am

helpappreciated wrote:Anyone have any experience using the Emmanuel S&T part 2 or the FINZ version? (I have part 1.) A male human, I've read your review of part 2, but what about FINZ?

No experience with Finz, sorry.

LockBox
Posts: 404
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:05 pm

Re: 2018 February CA Bar

Postby LockBox » Mon Jan 15, 2018 1:20 pm

supa_mitsu wrote:From what you wrote, my problem is probably that I find too many rules, subrules and standards that are not that relevant. I'll just try to get the main rules next time and try to keep it faster. Also, it doesn't help that I don't have an American JD (so I'm fairly new to doing all this stuff) so I probably just have to keep practicing and practicing. Hopefully for less than the duration of a whole JD! Thanks for the input.


I'll add my two cents, though I rarely studied for the PT's and passed them easily primarily due to my work experience. I agree with looking at the task memo and drafting an outline to begin. What you need to keep in mind is who is the audience? If you're writing an appellate brief, then the rules should be laid out in their entirety. If the memo is to a client describing a cause of action, I would truncate or synopsize the rule. Speak to your audience.

In addition, I didn't underline or highlight the rules as I read them - I actively wrote them down. If there were 3 issues, and I could tell the first case dealt with issue #1, I didn't wait until after reading the whole thing to write the rules. I would just copy any relevant rules, with each citation (Case #1, etc.) and then keep going. Perhaps afterwards, I would copy/paste to make it flow better, but if I knew the rule had to be down anyways, I wouldn't waste time by reading, then going back and typing.

In the end, on the PT"s you have to find what works for you to get a clean, finished product to the graders in 90 minutes. That's your task to figure out.




Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests