mm

Don't like it.

A professor wrote:

"Some upper level classes have abandoned exams of all sorts in favor of three short (4-5 pp.) graded memos, spaced more or less evenly over the semester.
Each memo offers a 7- to 10-day period between the assignment and the due date; each one is "open," in contemporary teaching jargon. Given my abundant use of the red pen, most memos are returned to their authors in bloody condition. My approach means that students are less likely to be evaluated on their mastery of a broad range of the material, but it also means that they are more likely to be evaluated fairly on their ability to synthesize their legal understanding with their ability to communicate thoughtfully in writing. A comment on a blog post can't convey all the nuances of the approach, but here are a few: Other downsides include the risk that students will plagiarize some or all of their memos, and the fact that I spend more time grading than I do with exams. Other upsides include my anecdotal experience that students learn to invest a substantial amount of time in producing memos that approach professional standards, and the fact that I get to enjoy concrete evidence that I am helping to teach them professional skills in substantive law courses. Of course, students have mixed feelings about actually receiving the feedback that they say that they crave.
My Deans and Associate Deans have been enthusiastic about this approach. Not only have course enrollments not suffered, but I have had to cap enrollments."