Student Handbook 2023/24
28. Appendix I
28.3. Essay Questions
These questions generally involve being asked to critically discuss some form of statement, such as a quotation from a judgement or an academic commentator about the relevant area of law.
The question may then specify the jurisdiction to which the answer should relate (e.g. ‘under UK law’) or it may ask you to compare two or more jurisdictions (e.g. ‘under UK and US law). In other questions the issue of jurisdiction may not be specified. Where the question contains no express or implied jurisdictional link, students may refer to any relevant jurisdiction of which they have knowledge, although the expectation is that the jurisdictions examined in class will form the basis of a response.
As this is a post-graduate programme, students are expected to critically engage with the subject matter of the module, and not simply describe the laws and regulations without further comment. A question may sometimes be ambiguous or deliberately provocative. Students should respond appropriately to such an approach, explaining the nature of the ambiguity or taking a position on the issue, whether in agreement with the statement, opposing it or identifying arguments from both perspectives as applicable. As such, students are expected to respond directly to the statement in its different parts and not simply write down everything they know about the topic, hoping that the examiners will be able to pick out the relevant analysis!
YOU SHOULD AVOID:
Long introductions; lots of historical background; lengthy descriptions of individual cases, statutes, institutions, procedures etc.; long explanations of legal terms (unless required by the introduction); overwhelming the examiner with complex detail; losing sight of the main points.
YOU SHOULD NOT:
- Regurgitate everything you know about “X” because “X” happens to be mentioned in the question;
- Wander into related but irrelevant areas of law, hoping the examiner will be happy to be led away from the question asked and dazzled into giving you points for your interesting but totally irrelevant discussion;
- Be consistent and do not contradict yourself (nothing wrong with changing your views but not in the same answer); inconsistent statements should be rationalised (e.g., as exceptions, limitations on application, etc.)
- Make wild and sweeping generalisations or assertions, unsupported by evidence (e.g. decided cases, statutes);
- Get emotional or angry.
YOU SHOULD:
- Answer the question asked – all parts of the question but only the question.
- Be analytical, evaluative, and critical.
- Appropriately analyse authorities on the topic.
- Discuss relevant controversial issues surrounding a topic.
- Express your own opinion on a topic (supported by evidence).
- Structure your answer in a logical and comprehensible manner (e.g. make a brief plan before you commence writing and/or break the answer into distinct sections).
AN ESSAY QUESTION INTRODUCTION SHOULD:
Briefly set the scene or environment and identify the area of law addressed by the question and state how you intend to deal with the question. If you think the question is ambiguous, say so and state how you intend to interpret it. If you only partly agree with the proposition/statement, say so and indicate very briefly but generally why and how you will address that in your answer.
THE MIDDLE PART OF THE ESSAY SHOULD:
Specifically address the question, by taking your key points one by one and discussing them logically, critically and analytically. Avoid lengthy descriptions of cases, statutes.
Not get trapped in irrelevant details of cases or statutes. That wastes time and words and adds nothing to your answer. Try to keep a wider perspective, focusing on the arguments you want to make. Essay questions usually require you to evaluate, compare, explain or comment on specific topics/issues.
Offer minimum descriptive detail – only enough to clarify your answer and support your arguments.
THE CONCLUDING REMARKS SHOULD:
Draw together the threads of your arguments. A conclusion should follow logically from what has gone before. It can also reflect on issues/developments going forward.
PROBLEM QUESTIONS
Problem questions generally present you with a scenario or series of facts and asks you to provide advice or commentary to someone, e.g. your client.
Before answering, review the problem and identify the significant facts and each of the issues you consider deserves a comment. Analyse the facts and assess them with reference to the relevant rules of law. Any advice or comment should endeavour to be even-handed and consider different aspects of the problem.
Be aware of any information that has not been supplied in the question and state how your answer may be affected by the absence of this information. However, do not make up your own missing facts and provide an answer to them unless you are told to do so.
Depending on what is requested, offer a solution and/or advice to the parties. Advise the parties of the strengths and weaknesses of any argument being asserted. Support your solution and/or advice with reference to decided cases and/or statutes.
In general, the structure of your answer should reflect the logical sequence suggested by the scenario or series of facts in the problem (e.g. is the proposed conduct a regulated activity; if so, what conditions are applicable).
If advising a party, do not say:
“Dear Mr. X, I think that you should do A, B, and C …”.
Instead, phrase your advice in this form:
“Mr. X should be advised that …”, i.e. give the advice in the form of an ‘opinion’.
GENERAL COMMENTS APPLICABLE TO ALL EXAMINATION QUESTIONS:
Do NOT waste time by doing any of the following:
- Copying out the question in your answer;
- Repeating the same points over and over or including irrelevant material;
- Listing large numbers of cases to show the examiner what a brilliant memory you have (only discuss cases relevant to the question/issue and for these give only brief, material facts).
- Dispute the facts or scenario given (e.g. making comments such as: “No one would ever be so stupid as to do …”).
- Respond in a manner designed to avoid addressing clearly relevant issues (e.g. “Mr. X should not take legal action because it is too costly”), unless you are asked to evaluate options or consider issues such as alternatives to litigation. Your job is to identify and apply the relevant law.
- Deny existing law (e.g. simply stating that the law is wrong!). Some questions positively invite you to disagree, dispute, suggest and provoke: in this case, go ahead, but provide support!
Do make sure to:
- Write simply and legibly. While you will not be specifically marked-down for messy writing, an unclear answer makes it more difficult for examiners to identify and assess points being made. Similarly, poor spelling and grammar can undermine the clarity of your answers and thereby affect grading.
- Aid clarity by setting out your answer using separate paragraphs, headings or sections, where appropriate, to deal with separate issues. You may underline key cases, names or legislation to emphasize them in your answer.
- Discuss relevant authority for your arguments. Many examinations may be closed-book, however (i.e. you are not permitted to take any materials into the exam room). In closed book exams, you will not generally be marked down if you cannot remember the correct name of a case or the precise section number of a statutory provision, unless it is considered indicative of a broader misunderstanding of the question being asked.
- Answer the question asked, not the one you hoped would be asked!
- Give yourself time to review your answers just in case you have omitted a vital word or two (e.g. a crucial “not” …).
PART II: ASSESSMENT CRITERIA GUIDELINES
These guidelines cover the criteria for the assessment of taught modules through examination, as well as extended written work. The criteria build upon and supplement Queen Mary’ Assessment Handbook, available at: http://www.arcs.qmul.ac.uk/policy/
These criteria also consider the Master’s Degree Characteristics Statement (September 2015), which has been issued by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA), and describes the distinctive features of master’s degrees in the UK. The Statement is available at:
Students should note that in all cases two internal examiners carry out the summative assessment of examinations and extended written work, according to the standards set out below, while external examiners review the examination process as a whole.
