CRACKING the CODE on LAW MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS

GOULD's

CRACKING THE CODE on LAW MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS

BY: PATRICK GOULD, J.D., M.A.

All rights are reserved.

This book contains material protected under International and Federal Copyright Laws and Treaties. Any unauthorized reprint or use of this material is prohibited. You may not distribute this book in any way. You may not sell it, or reprint any part of it without written consent from the author, except for the inclusion of brief quotations in a review.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION...... 4

BACKGROUND OF MCQ TEST DEVELOPMENT...... 5

GOULD'S MCQ TEMPLATE APPROACH...... 9

TIME MANAGEMENT...... 12

INTRODUCTION

When I worked as a Professor of Curriculum Development for Concord University School of Law from 2000-2004, I developed a school-wide multiple choice question testing protocol for Contracts, Criminal Law, Torts, Civil Procedure, Criminal Procedure, Constitutional Law, Real Property and Evidence.

I now pass onto you, the law student, the "Inside Information" about how to become an Expert at MCQ's!

BACKGROUND of MCQ TEST DEVELOPMENT

It is important that law students understand how MCQ examinations are developed, in order that they later be able to Break the Code of MCQ's.

When I developed MCQ testing protocols, for each comprehensive substantive law course, I first comprehensively analyzed the law involved, and then broke the law down into separate sections, depending on the breadth of the law, and on the complexity of the law.

Then, I allocated a certain percentage of questions for each sub-area of law, and further delineated the substantive requirements for each of these sub-areas of substantive law.

It was at that point that I started to develop multiple choice questions (MCQ's) for specific areas of substantive law. After I picked a sub-area to write a question for, I again analyzed the components of that area of law. For example, if I were to write a question that tested for trespass to land, I would consult my notes, and look for all of the sub-issues that were relevant to a trespass to land issue. Then, I would pick a specific sub-issue within trespass to land that I would center the question around.

For instance, I might decide to test for the fact that a defendant need not know they were on someone else's property, for a viable trespass to land claim to exist.

Then, I would develop a scenario based on the fact that a trespassing defendant was unaware that they were on the property of another, while throwing in a distracting statement or two. Soon enough, the question would begin to develop itself, almost magically, as I inserted additional facts. For example:

"Joseph took a walk around the boundary line that surrounded his twenty acres of pristine Maine land. As he walked his property line, he intended to stay within the boundary line of his property, as delineated by orange markings made on straight lines of trees along the property line, which he had hired a surveyor to mark. As it turns out, Joseph walked on the property of Jane, even though he followed the marking on the trees, and even though he did not have the intent to walk on her property."

After I developed the body of the question, I decided on how I would specifically test for the topic area, through development of a call of the question. To continue the example, the call of the above question would read:

"In a trespass to land action, Jane will:"

At this point, I developed four answer choices.

The main objective in development of a law MCQ test, is to try and hide the issues and the answers from the students, in order to end up with a bell-curve distribution of scores.

Therefore, my objective in writing the answer choices, was to word the answer choices vaguely enough, so that a number of students would be confused, and thereby choose the wrong answer. Further, throughout the question and the answer choices, I made sure to use specific legal words that might lead a student to ruminate in different directions. In a trespass to land situation, I might use words such as "intent" or "intended," that might draw the attention of a student in different directions, thus muddling their thinking, and increasing the chances that they would choose the wrong answer.

Additionally, I might insert extraneous facts to serve as detractors, in order to trick students to choose incorrect answer choices.

To continue the trespass to land example:

"In a trespass to land action, Jane will:

A. Prevail, because Joseph walked on her property.

B. Lose, because Joseph was responsible for knowing the parameters of his own property line.

C. Lose, because Joseph did not have the requisite intent to trespass on Jane's property.

D. Lose, because Joseph caused no damage to Jane's property."

Finally, I wrote an analysis of the answer choices, to serve as a full and distinctive analytical guide for Law Professors at Concord University School of Law, to assist them in understanding the correct answer choices of the various MCQ examinations that I developed. For example, the analysis of the above question might read:

"The correct answer is answer choice "A." Joseph did indeed trespass on the land of Jane, because he walked onto her property without her consent, and while fully aware of his actions. Answer choice "B" is a correct statement of fact, but it is irrelevant to the analysis of a trespass to land claim, because a defendant need not be aware that they are on the property of another, they need only be aware of their actions. Answer choice "C" seems intuitive, because many of the intentional torts require that the defendant have an intention to take a specific act. However, the intent threshold for trespass to land is very low, and defendant need only have an intent to take the actions that they took, and need not have the specific intent to trespass on someone else's land. Here, Joseph was not pushed onto Jane's land involuntarily, nor was he unconscious. Therefore, when he stepped onto Jane's land, his action was intentional under the context of a trespass to land claim. Finally, answer choice "D" is incorrect, because while it is true that Joseph caused no damage to Jane's land, Jane may seek nominal damages in a trespass to land claim, which will not call for her to prove damages."

My MCQ Exams in the various substantive law subject areas, have returned bell-curve distributions of scores over many years.

The remainder of this course is intended to help YOU to Break the Code of MCQ Exams, and Score Higher on Your Examinations!

GOULD's MCQ

TEMPLATE APPROACH to

"BREAKING THE CODE" on MCQ's

In order to Break the Code on MCQ's, you must approach them in the opposite direction in which they were developed. As stated above, the answer is written first, and then the call and answer choices. When you approach your MCQ's, go backwards, and first consider the call of the question and the answer choices, and then the question itself.

The reason for this is that you must first determine the area of law that the question will be testing your knowledge of. If you read the body of the question first, the facts could be related to Contract Law, or to Torts, or to Criminal Law. If you read the body of the question first, your mind will be scattered and unfocused, and you are likely to be easily fooled by the answer choices.

Therefore, first read the call of the question and the four answer choices. The call of the question will often state a specific area of law, or a specific claim, that you should focus on. Again, read the “call” of the question to ascertain what is being asked of you. This will focus your attention on a particular rule, theory, defense, statute or exception in the answers.

Then, the four answer choices will help you to determine the different areas of a specific doctrine that could possibly be the correct answer. Read the answer choices after reading the call of the question, to ascertain any mis-statements of the law thereby allowing you to eliminate some answer choices, immediately. Some answer choices are intentionally inserted as foil and distracter answer choices, and be on the look-out for those types of answer choices.

You should be able to ascertain at this point, the template that you will use to answer your question.

Know your various Gould's Templates, because if you do not, you will have limited your cognitive ability to retrieve and categorize the necessary information that the question demands. You will easily fall prey to foil and detractor facts and answer choices, and your score will suffer.

However, when you are armed with Gould's Templates, you will focus your attention on the relevant Templates, and focus the cross-hairs of each Template on the relevant facts in each MCQ. As you further consider the question, you will hone in with more precision on the correct answer, and be able to choose the correct answer more easily. Since you have already read the call of the question and the answer choices, your concentration will be heightened as you read the body of the question, and you will stay on track throughout the fact pattern. Additionally, you will conserve mental energy, gain confidence, and improve your overall score.

Finally, re-read the answers to determine if you can eliminate any other answers not related to the call of the question. Apply the template to the facts of the question, and answer the question.

The Template Approach to Multiple Choice Questions, allows you, the law student, to concentrate on the Interactive Template Elements relevant to each question, filter out Extraneous Law, focus on the Correct Party, Eliminate Foils and Detractors, wade through the Trickery, and Focus the Cross-Hairs of Your Intellect with a Template that allows you to think Comprehensively, with Integration, and with Precision, about the question.

The Template Approach to MCQ's will allow you to stop muddling through MCQ's. Instead, you will learn to deftly evade and escape land mines, and use the Templates to seek out and identify the correct answer. Templates will focus your attention on a particular section of a question that contains the theory, defense, exception or statute that you are being asked about in the call of the question. You will no longer be cowed by MCQ's, rather, you will be in control of MCQ's!

TIME MANAGEMENT

I focus on Time Management when I teach law student how to write effective legal essays. Time Management is just as important with MCQ's, but for a slightly different reason.

During an essay exam, students will stay focused, but they will just plainly run out of time. This sometimes also happens on an MCQ exam. However, for the most part, students on an MCQ exam, become confused, tired, and worn-out, a short time into the exam. Their focus becomes fuzzy, as they read fact after fact. The Template Approach to attacking MCQ's helps students to keep their focus, but they must also apply the See-Saw Approach to time management, in order to stay alert for the entire MCQ exam.

The See-Saw Approach entails starting at answer choice 100, and working yourself backwards, while stopping at the short questions, and answering them first. In other words, 'Cherry Pick' the short answers first. When you finish an answer, write a big "X" across it in the answer booklet, so that you do not try to answer it again.

When you apply the See-Saw Approach, and answer all of the short questions first, starting from 100 and going down to 1, you conserve your mental energy, and pick up momentum and speed as you progress through your MCQ exam. Meanwhile, other students become bogged down in the quicksand of long fact patterns, and often tire themselves out early in the exam.

When you reach the first question, See-Saw in the opposite direction, and answer the remaining questions from 1 to 100. You should already have answered a significant amount of questions, and you will be ready to tackle the larger questions!