Contracts... and my Letter - December 12, 2007

The below summarizes my Contracts Final Examination experience. Given the circumstances, I feel great about my performance on the test.

Cheers!

-----


To Whom It May Concern:

In a normal course of events, I would strive to avoid complaint, but the circumstances of a final today do not allow me to remain silent. I am sure your office receives numerous irate and questioning students posing varying qualities of issues about fairness and test-writing. Passing judgment as to the quality of questions on a test is reserved for those times when there is more than one occurrence of what can be described as that which we have been taught amounts to negligence.

Professor S. presented our 1L Contracts class with a final examination that was noticeably flawed and carelessly left without updates. More than once, questions would speak to one subject in the prompt, and the subsequent multiple-choice answers would refer to a very different subject. In one prompt a limousine was the item in question in a transaction; the proceeding answers left us to decide between an answer that could very possibly fit and an answer that fit but referred to a boat. If we were to assume he meant limousine and not a boat, the second answer would be the correct choice, if we were to assume instructor infallibility, the first would be the best choice. This type of problem occurred multiple times; one question spoke about scooters, and the answers referred to widgets.

The problem with assuming a mistake on the professor's part occurred where the Professor posed a question about a volume seller, but directed us to refer to the first part of a section of the UCC that spoke to non-volume sellers. The second part of the very same section speaks to volume sellers. Were we to follow his instructions, we would be applying the wrong part of the UCC yielding a certain answer; to apply the correct part of the UCC would be another answer that was provided. The supposition that the professor made mistakes in questioning would lead to one answer; reasoning that he purposely wrote the test as he did, led to another answer.

Many law schools provide students with a form, as a part of each test, that they can use to challenge questions of this nature. I do not envy the Professors in the test writing and grading processes, but fairness in questioning is a very large issue. Test questions should not require students to make wild assumptions as to the intent and carelessness of the professor in addition to attempting to presume the circumstances under which the test was written.

Thank you for your time in addressing this issue. I imagine I am not the only one bringing this issue to your attention.

Should the issue require further explanation or description, I would be delighted to assist you in any way I can. You may reach me by email or telephone at your convenience.

Again, I apologize if I come across as complaining, but I realize that this is an issue that has the potential to affect no only myself, but my peers as well. It is also that which should be corrected for the future, as it is unreasonable to expect high performance on exams that are not of the highest quality themselves.

Very Respectfully Yours,