So here's the ethical dilemma. I've come to find out that some people will write a verbose answer to a given topic in their outline like executive power or standing. Does everyone do this? Is it OK to do this. Most people that I've queried at my school say, well, you are allowed to bring in anything that is your own work product, so that would fit. But everyone seems to say that with an uncomfortable pinching look on their face.
Part of me says, well, great, if you want to put that much effort into your prep for the exam, go you. But the other part of me says, but wait, that saves them TONS of time on the test. They can't copy and paste, but they can transcribe quickly, which in the end might be unfair to people who come to the test with only an outline, which as I was taught in jr high, is not something containing complete sentences.
What do you tihnk? I'm really on the fence here. But I am leaning toward it not passing ethical muster. It's the gut reaction. It just feels wrong. I've found that siting down and taking timed practice tests are the only way to go because just writing it down once or twice helps me get started on the actual test. I'm not sitting there thinking I know this stuff, but how do I write it down best.
I truly welcome both sides here. Let me know what you think.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I don't see a problem with it either -- I'm too lazy to actually do it, though. I agree with Janine that I doubt it would help much, since long explanations of the law won't get you that far on an exam.
Post a Comment