Quote of the week

The judgments are replete with the findings of dishonesty and mala fides against Major General Ntlemeza. These were judicial pronouncements. They therefore constitute direct evidence that Major General Ntlemeza lacks the requisite honesty, integrity and conscientiousness to occupy the position of any public office, not to mention an office as more important as that of the National Head of the DPCI, where independence, honesty and integrity are paramount to qualities. Currently no appeal lies against the findings of dishonesty and impropriety made by the Court in the judgments. Accordingly, such serious findings of fact in relation to Major General Ntlemeza, which go directly to Major General Ntlemeza’s trustworthiness, his honesty and integrity, are definitive. Until such findings are appealed against successfully they shall remain as a lapidary against Lieutenant General Ntlemeza.

Mabuse J
Helen Suzman Foundation and Another v Minister of Police and Others
30 April 2010

On Constitutional Law exam drafting – Prof Ruthann Robson

Prof Ruthann Robson, on the Constitutional Law Prof Blog, has some handy tips for lecturers in setting exams.

Here are some principles, hints, reminders, observations, and opinions:

1/    Using another professor’s exam is pedagogically unsound, unless, of course, your students attended another professor’s class all semester.   This is true even if the other professor is now President of the United States.

2/    Recycling one of your own exams is pedagogically suspect.  Even if you attempted to keep your previous exam questions secret and for some reason eschewed the better practice of distributing previous exam questions to students for their studying purposes), if they can find Professor Obama’s exam from 1996, they can find your previous exams.  And do.

3/     Selecting the format of the exam is most likely no longer an option, because your syllabus stated (didn’t it?) whether the exam would be essay, open-book, short essays, or multiple choice. (True/False, let’s face it, is not a viable option past the third grade.)   Because you have integrity, your syllabus reflects your choice of the exam style which you believe is most pedagogically sound.  Therefore, this is not the time to regret your choice because “grading” multiple choice exams is infinitely easier than grading essays.   You enjoy grading, don’t you?

3/    Looking at your own after-class notes (which, let’s assume, you diligently kept), will refresh your memory of the issues that this year’s students found particularly interesting, troubling, or worthwhile.  These experiences can help you tailor the exam to this year’s students and make their experience unique.  It can also improve attendance in future semesters.

4/    Reviewing the in-class problems or exercises you did with your students during the semester is a great source of exam material.   Again, let’s assume you assigned several problems.  One or two?

5/    Reflecting current controversies, especially those that have been newsworthy, can be a great strategy in drafting an exam. It can provide details, but it can also frame the narrative of your exam.  And you do want your exam to be interesting, don’t you?  This semester, as we noted earlier this month, health care reform is an obvious choice, and not only because a 900 page statute provides lots of possibilities.

6/    Remembering to provide ALL the specific material and explanations students would need to answer the exam question(s) is vital.  This is especially important if you are using a current controversy, but applies whenever you draft a question.  For example, if you’ve decided on health care as the underlying topic, you don’t want students to be pondering the definition of  “CHIP” or rewarding students who know the meaning of  “CHIP” when what you mean to be testing is federalism or commerce clause issues.

7/    Testing what you’ve taught seems an obvious, if not universally-shared goal.  Can you key every issue, analysis, and answer to your syllabus?  You should do this with colored highlighters.

8/     Rereading your exam from the perspective of a student is a great exercise.  Try to channel the students with whom you least identify as you read.  Would he be offended by your attempt to be witty?  Would she not understand your cultural allusion?

9/    Writing out your rubric (or feedback sheet) for essay exams is essential.  But also write out an answer to the exam question(s).  Do it in the time allotted.  And if you are giving a closed book exam, then no peeking.

10/    Grading your own answer with your feedback sheet and then keying it to your syllabus and the pages of the Casebook and other assigned materials should keep you honest.  You’ll probably give yourself an “A,” but did you do as well as you thought you would?

11/   Collaborating with another professor after you have a written your almost-final draft is an amazing experience.   You must know colleagues who teaches in the same area?   Trading exams can produce a great discussion, especially if you disagree with each other.  As for taking each other’s exams, well, that can also produce a discussion.

12/    Consulting with Academic Support can provide support for you as well as for your students.  If you are lucky enough to have involved Academic Support Professors, as I am, their expertise is a gift you shouldn’t refuse.  If you haven’t had the opportunity to have lunch with someone from Academic Support this semester, now would be a good time.

13/    Proofing and reproofing cannot be neglected, especially given all the revisions you’ve been doing.  “Fresh eyes,” as they say, are a real asset.  Now is the time to enlist any friends you have who are not involved in the law.  You do have some friends outside the law, don’t you?

Good luck!

2015 Constitutionally Speaking | website created by Idea in a Forest