I will call you back. Attention! I said “ATTENTION”
[bla-bla-bla] Listen rookies! This is the obstacle course! Welcome to the jumper! Leap from tire to
tire and get to the next obstacle! This is the wall challenge! Get over the small wall and the high wall! Meet the crock`s pond /spawn/. Get safely to the other side Avoid falling into water! Hungry crocodiles are there! Let me introduced you to the Butcher! If you manage to pass through it, you pass the exam! If you don`t – you start over again! Now! Go! Sir! Yes sir! [ warming joints ] [ laughter ] I am free!!! Get ready! Fire! [ laughter ] Oh Auch Ouch Ouuu… [ whistle ] [ laughter ] Get ready! Next! [ laughter ] Listen team! A dangerous criminal is
inside this house! Be careful! Work as a team and arrest him! Go! [ giggle ] hmm… hmm… hmm… [ laughter ] Hey! Hi! Hey! [ cough ] Aha! You are under arrest! Great job rookies! You have passed the
exam! Congratulations rookies! These are your
new rides! Not these! The other ones! [ laughter ] [ laughter ] Give me the money! Hey! Get lost cops! Aaa… Drop your weapon! You missed! You missed again! [ laughter ] [ laughter ] Bullet proof! Chief! A criminal with an armored
bulldozer is trying to rob the bank! We need assistance! RUN!!! Okay! Rookies go help him! Yes, sir! [ skunk`s attack ] You go this way! We go that way!
Okay? Yes! [ skeleton snarl ] Come on! Crokie! Crokie! Am-am? Eat these cops! Am-am… Man, I am going out of here! Am-am-am-am… Ohh! Give me a break! I give up!
Ah, I love my school supplies! Your school supplies? Have you seen mine? No offense but yours are kind of boring. Yours are straight up ugly and that’s a fact! Ladies, no need to argue! We already had two competitions in our class,
remember which? Halloween costumes! Correct! And? Slime competition! Exactly! Should we throw a DIY School supplies competition as well? Yes! Let’s do it! Let the games begin! A staple in every school bag is a notebook,
so give me your best DIY notebook ideas! Here’s a super cool notebook idea, which doubles
up as a pencil holder. Grab an old pair of jeans or shorts and cut
out the back pocket. These shorts are way too small and short for
me so I decided to recycle them and give them a new life. Stick the pocket to the notebook using a hot
glue gun or other glue with a good hold. My notebook is pretty plain and you know me
– plain is just not my vibe! Let’s decorate it with a few iron on patches,
which go perfectly with the jeans theme of our notebook! Place all your pens and pencils into the pocket
and you’re ready for school! How freaking amazing is that! A pencil case and a notebook in one. You can also use the pocket for other school
necessities like paper pins, post it notes and so on! I love the transformation from my plain and
boring notebook to this cute, useful, fun and unique version. What an upgrade! Look at this a gorgeous flamingo picture – so
adorable! You know what? Let’s make a fluffy flamingo notebook. Find a flamingo picture online, print it and
cut out with scissors. Stick the flamingo to your notebook! To make this creation even more special, glue
a fluffy pom pom on top! The trick is to match the pom pom color to
the color of your flamingo – that way everything will come together nicely! And the best part is that you can make so
many different animals using pom poms. Uuu beautiful! Yay! I love the colors and the pom pom. You started strong Katie. It’s an eight! Here’s my notebook miss teacher. I love this idea! A notebook and a pencil case in one, so smart! I love how useful this is. Sara, you get a nine! Yes! For the next round I want to see your best
DIY pencil cases and pencil holders. Yes, I have an epic idea! So many fuzzy socks! What are they for you ask? We’ll use a fuzzy sock to create our fluffy
unicorn pencil pot! Place a little pot, glass or a jar in a fuzzy
sock like that. Cut away the excess fabric at the bottom of
your pencil pot. Put together a horn and a pair of ears from
felt and stick them to the pot. I cut the unicorn eyes with long perky lashes
from black foam paper. Finish up your creation with a bunch of mini
pom poms. Alternatively you can use artificial flowers,
beads, buttons or any other decor you can find at your home. This fuzzy unicorn pencil holder is just the
cutest thing ever! Such an amazing room decoration and desk organization piece. Another fluffy DIY? Yes please! Place a rectangular piece of fabric on a flat
surface and make sure to have a furry part facing down. Put a zipper across the lower third like that. Apply a stripe of hot glue along the bottom half to fold the bottom part of furry fabric up. Repeat the step on the upper part of the zipper. Place a pair of pointy teeth on before folding
the red fur fabric down like that. I made the teeth from a piece of white felt. Flip your creation inside out and make sure
to open the zipper. Cut two horns from black felt and place them
inside our furry pocket on both sides, like I’m doing here. Sew the left and right edges together. Flip the pencil case inside out to reveal
your epic creation! All that’s missing are a pair of googly eyes
and our fluffy monster pencil case is finished! I am obsessed with this little guy! Pouches like these are so useful to have. Whether it’s for for your pens, makeup or
other bits and pieces. They make organizing so much easier and more
fun. I need to buy furry fabric in other colors
and make a bunch of monster friends asap! Yup a fluffy monster family of pouches is
absolutely needed in my life! Aaa! What is this, a devil? It’s a monster pencil case, come on it’s epic! No no, it’s not my cup of tea! The execution is nice, but that’s it! It’s a five! What?! That’s crazy! This monster is cute not scary! Stop! Katie it’s your turn. I made an adorable unicorn pencil holder. Oh this is absolutely gorgeous! The cutest pencil pot I’ve ever seen. It’s a nine! Yes! Next I want you to make DIY school bags! Let’s go! Alright! How should we pimp up this plain jeans backpack! I know – let’s draw on an evil eye! Begin by sketching the design. That’s a very important step for me as I find
free hand drawing super hard. Take some fabric paints and color the evil
eye. I want to make my backpack a bit more funky
and colorful. Let’s go for yellow lashes plus yellow, red
blue accents below the eye. Take some clay – I decided to start with red. Place a larger circle of clay on a flat surface. Top it with white, blue and black circles,
which should be smaller and smaller. Let’s flatten with a roller. Next take a needle and make a little hole
on the edge. When the clay hardens a cool evil eye pendant
is born! Decorate it with beads, tassels or other pieces
that you have at home and tie it on your backpack! My evil eye backpack turned out so well! It’s fun and bright but at the same time not
too crazy and in your face! I love it! This color scheme makes it super wearable. You can pair it with jeans, skirts or even
sweatpants. It’s so versatile and I already know I’ll
be using it all the time! Next backpack creation is super fun, bright
and extremely delicious! Let’s transform this bright pink school bag
in a tasty desert, yummy! First up – melted chocolate! Draw a chocolate dripping design using black
or brown fabric paint. Feel free to chose any other color and make
your bag even more funky! I want to have some cool 3D shine details
on the drips. Cut a teardrop shape out of a piece of masking
tape. Stick these templates on the lower parts of
the drips and color them in white. Once everything is colored, remove the masking
tape and reveal your epic chocolate dripping backpack! We need a pendant decor for this backpack
as well! Glue a silicone cupcake liner to a pom pom
and you have an adorable fluffy cupcake that you can use as a key chain or a backpack decoration! You could also draw colorful sprinkles allover
the chocolate drippings on your school bag. Another epic idea would be to draw each drip
in one rainbow color! You would end up with a rainbow paint dripping
backpack. What can we do, I love these dripping DIYs
way too much! Uuu I like it! Girly but still a bit edgy! And I love the little cupcake as well. It’s a nine! Yes! Here’s mine miss teacher. Mhm… the evil eye! You’re in the spooky mood today Sara, aren’t
you? Actually, I really like this and the decor
with tassels is absolutely stunning. You get a ten! Bravo, bravo! Woohoo! Sara is two points behind, but it’s not over
yet. For the last round I want to see DIY pencil
ideas. Oh, these flowers look all dry and dead, but
hey there’s an awesome hack, which will allow us to have beautiful flowers on our desk all
year around! Take a plant pot like this one and optionally
decorate it to your liking. I decided to color a few of these little triangles
in pink, blue and yellow to make my plant pot a bit cuter! Once the acrylic paint dries, you can fill
the pot with some decorative sand. Everything is ready for our flowers to be
planted. Take a green pencil, remove the eraser and
stick it in the sand. Squeeze some hot glue in the empty eraser
hole and place on a fake flower! Add more flowers to your flower pot and your
cute flower decor slash stationary slash pencil pot is completed! How cute is that! Long ago I gave up on having real flowers
in my home because I just can’t keep them alive. So this flower pencil pot decoration is absolutely
perfect for me – I get my flowers, cuteness on my desk and an awesome organization holder
for all my pencils! Wanna give a complete makeover to your plain
pencils? Apply some hot glue on the top part of the
pencil. Stick on a fluffy pom pom. Add two small pom poms in the same color scheme
and top them with a pair of googly eyes! The result are the cutest fluffy pencils with
bulging eyes! This DIY idea is so quick and easy to put
together but turned out absolutely adorable! I mean look at these guys. Plain pencils are very inexpensive, while
special version with cool toppers or other details usually cost a lot more. So save up your coin and make your school
supplies amazing yourself! Are you guys ready to find out who will be
the final winner?! Fluffy pom pom pencils! Actually, these are really lovely! Your score is… It’s an eight! Here’s my pencil creation miss teacher. Oh my goodness! This is the most beautiful idea ever! Really? It’s for you. You can have it because you’re nice and beautiful
just like a flower. Are you sure? Thank you so much! Your score is… Seriously? It’s a 10! Bravo, bravo and thank you for
the flowers! Yes! I object! She didn’t follow the rules! You said DIY pencils and she made a DIY pencil pot! Plus she’s trying to bribe you! She should be disqualified! This is not true, I made a better DIY than
you just accept it! This is such a lie and you know it! Silence! This competition is canceled! You two are impossible, but thanks for the
flowers! I wonder if there will ever be a drama free
competition in this classroom! Just the though of it makes me so excited! Who knows maybe it happens next time. Make sure to subscribe and ring the bell so
you don’t miss our future adventures! Love you and I’ll see you soon, mwah!
What I’d like to do is to go ahead and
talk to you for maybe 20 or 30 minutes, tops, and then open up to your questions
and answers and I’ll give my answers. Of course, this is a session for you so I’m
going to cover the things that I think are important for you to know but I also want to leave ample time for you to ask me the the questions that you have in mind. And just speaking roughly I’m going to
break my remarks into three parts. I’m first going to say just a couple of
words to try to demystify the law school exam then I’m going to go ahead and give you some advice about studying for exams — studying going into and then during the exam period — then talk very specifically about the law school exam itself. What it is that we’re looking for on these exams. And then again, as I said, we’ll go ahead
and — and open it up for your questions. The first thing that I wanted to do,
though, is to demystify. I probably don’t need to do this because I think many of you have taken midterms. We’ve made an effort to have more midterms available precisely so that you’ll know what it is to expect on the final but whether or not that’s the case I just want to emphasize: these are exams. You’ve taken many exams before and there’s no question that you did really,
really well on those exams, otherwise you wouldn’t be sitting here in this room. So in some very important sense you do know what to expect. You’ve taken exams before.
This is a very similar exercise. And if you follow the strategies that brought you here, do the things that worked well for you in the past, you’re going to have a lot of success here at the law school as well. The next thing I want to do, though, is just to focus briefly on what’s being tested. Again with an effort to demystify. People often have the sense, I don’t know what I’m going to be tested on and I think that you do know what you’re going to be tested on and I think there are two things that you’d want to keep in mind. First, you’re going to be tested on the doctrinal content that you’ve been studying. You’ve been taking four courses: contracts, torts, civil procedure and criminal law and you’ve been learning the law in each of those areas and of course that’s one of main objectives on the exam: is going to be to test your knowledge of that doctrinal content so clearly that’s material that you want to study. It’s new to you.
There’s an awful lot of it. You’re going to have to review it again before you take the exam but again, you know exactly what that material is and you know how to learn it: you have to read it, you have to absorb it and then use your own, you know, well-developed skills to retain it so that you can deploy it on the exam. The other thing, and I think the thing that makes us anxious when we first approach law school exams, is, of course, you’re also being tested on a new set of skills. So there’s this new methodology that we’re aiming to teach you, this thing called “thinking like a lawyer,” or legal analysis. And of course, that skill is going to be tested on the exam as well. And this is what we have in mind when we tell you that we don’t want the exams to be merely descriptive. We don’t want you simply to describe or regurgitate the doctrinal content that
you’ve learned. Instead what we want you to do is to deploy that content in analyzing the — the cases that you’re given. So what the exam is going to do is
to test your ability to recognize the kinds of questions that a lawyer would ask when encountering that case. So in a rule that’s governed by the — in a world that’s governed by the rule of law, what are the questions that a lawyer would have about this case? you’re going to want to identify the range of plausible answers to those questions. But more important than identifying the
answers, you want to be sure that you articulate the arguments that will move a decision-maker to endorse one answer over another. So that’s the analytical content:
what are the questions that this fact pattern raises? What are the plausible answers that the parties will offer? And then, more important, you want
to develop the arguments that support those answers. And so that’s the analytical content.
So I take it you do have a good sense. You’ve been exposed to this doctrine for a whole semester. You’re learning it and you’ve also, along the way — I hope you’ve remarked this, certainly I know that most of you have —
you’ve been learning those skills. You’ve been seeing how lawyers make arguments in cases. How judges respond to those arguments when constructing the opinions that you’re reading. I wanted to stop next — this is the second part — and give you some preliminary thoughts about studying for the exams. Some things that I found crucial when I was a law student and then things that I’ve continued to observe that people find crucial here. The first point I want to make — and this is essential — it’s essential this semester and it will be essential going
forward — you want to make sure that you know the professor’s ground rules for taking the exam and exactly what kind of exam is it going to be. Be sure that you find out from the professor what kind of materials you can use during the exam. Is it open book?
Partial open book? Restricted open book?
Is it closed book? You know, what kinds of materials can you use during the exam? And then the other absolutely crucial point is to know: what is the format of the questions on the exam? Is it going to be short, short essays?
Is it going to be multiple choice? What exactly is it going to consist of? As you know from taking midterms, many of the questions will be designed to be taken in an hour. You’re given a case and you have to write a fairly detailed essay about that one
case. Um — is it going to be an exam of that sort? Or, as I said, is it going to be multiple-choice? Some combination of the above? You have to know these things so make sure you ask your professors those questions. Another point that I want to make — and this is something that was difficult for me to do effectively when I was a law student — you’ve got to pace yourself when studying for the exam. So particularly now, as you’re moving into the reading period, into the run-up just before the exam, you really have to be thoughtful about managing your time. Please be sure that you know the time and the date for each of your exams and then you want to make a sensible plan for how to use your time most effectively during the reading period. You really want to think about which exams are going to be harder for you to study for,
which you’re going to be easier and then make sure you have a plan for using days, half-days, even hours. You really want to allocate your time sensibly so that you have enough time to study for each exam. This is really important.
And as I said it was really difficult for me to do. I was married during the exam.
I was married in law school. I’m still married.
It just drove my husband crazy. I just had a lot of trouble moving from one
subject to another and — and — and that’s something that you’ve got to do. The next question is outlines.
People often ask: what are outlines? I had this question. I came back from Thanksgiving break and nearly died of panic when the woman sitting next to me said she had all her outlines done. I didn’t know what an outline was at that point. I hadn’t finished the reading for class that day. Knowing me, I’m a very slow and plodding reader. So outlines: what are they? Think of it as your own little treatise for the content of the course. It’s a document in which you lay out all of the doctrine you learned in the class. Think of it as the anatomy of that class. What the bones of the criminal law — What are the most basic elements? Identify the bones and then try to put as much flesh as you can onto those bones as possible. What are the specific elements of a criminal cause of action, of a contract, of a tort? How are those elements defined by courts? How are they proved up? What are the exceptions to those elements and so forth and at the same time the outline will remind you of the lawyering skills that you need to be developing. What were the arguments that were made
in a given case as for why a particular element was satisfied or not? What did the judge conclude and — and why? So it’s just your own little treatise. My most successful experience — and I know this from talking to students year in
and year out — my most successful experiences and yours too are likely to be when you’ve done all of your own studying. Whether you create an outline or not. Some of us have photographic memories. We never have to write anything
down. That wasn’t me but other people’s work may be useful. Reading other people’s outlines.
Share them with each other. Commercial outlines. But typically if you go through the entire material yourself you’re going to have the
greatest success. The other point that I want to make too is you want to leave a little bit of time to outline the outline because if the professor lets you use an outline in class you’re going to want to have a shorter document, right? that — we had documents — yours maybe on the computer I’m not really sure where you keep things these days but you’re going to want to have something — a short list, an index — that lets you get into the outline quickly or just brings the issues back to you quickly. That — that’s something that I found most useful. The other thing that I would recommend is that you make use of your professors during the exam period as well if you’re having trouble understanding a question. It may be that the professor can clear it up for you very quickly and you don’t
need to spend a lot of time worrying or it may be a question that’s genuinely
difficult and the reason you’re having trouble is because it’s genuinely difficult. That means it’s likely to be something that could be tested on the exam so you should come upstairs and talk to us about it. The other thing to do is to make sure you know whether your professors have office hours posted, special rules for access during exams. People have different approaches to that
question. Okay so now I’m just going to give you some specific suggestions for approaching exams and many of these are very basic but, again, I’m going to go through them because they’re helpful and, again, each year I find that people make certain basic mistakes and I want to make sure you avoid them. So the first thing you want to do is to just read the exam question. Make sure that you look at the entire document. Make sure you have a complete document. And I would strongly recommend that you skim the entire thing before getting started writing. You want to make sure that you don’t miss a page or, god forbid, a question. Once in a while people will just miss the fact that there’s a question or they’ll miss a page and they won’t obviously have access to the material on that page. It’s not a complete disaster but obviously
you don’t want to be in that situation. So, skim the thing to know what’s there. Skimming will also help you to begin to prepare your plan of attack, right? You’ll get a sense of where the different issues are on the exam. The law school exam aims to be comprehensive. Most of them fail in being completely
comprehensive but lots of professors try to cover most, if not all, of the doctrinal content that they covered in class and skimming will help you say, oh there’s the question on attempt. Oh there’s the question on homicide, there
are dead people there. Oh, there’s the question on, you know, whatever it would be. And that gives you a little bit of a sense about — about what your plan of attack is going to be. The next thing that I want to mention is be sure that you notice the start and stop times for the questions and take those time allocations seriously. Again, this can be difficult to do. You’ll be in the middle of a question and you just won’t want to give it up. You won’t want to move on but, trust me, it’s the law of diminishing returns. You’ve got to move on to the next question. And so — so follow those time allocations carefully. Obviously, once you’ve skimmed, you want to read each of the questions carefully. Take a deep breath, read them carefully. One point that I want to make here that
comes up from time to time and can — it’s — it’s — it’s a funny issue that gets people in trouble. It might be counterintuitive.
But professors get their fact patterns from lots of different places. So we get them from real cases,
we get them from our heads, we make them up. We also get them from fiction, from comic books, plays, movies, TV. So sometimes you’ll be reading an exam
and you’ll go, oh, I recognize that homicide. That’s the homicide from The Godfather
Part 22 or that’s the homicide from Training Day.
And you’re probably right! At the moment that you recognize the case and think you know it, that’s when you should read the most carefully because the professor has surely made some changes — has introduced some changes in order to make it an intelligible question and I’ve actually had students get into trouble — not in my class but in others —
where they have made assumptions about what the facts were based on their watching from some television show or
some opera and therefore they don’t read as carefully as they should. The other thing, though, that I want to say in connection with this, is even though we make a lot of this, some of us make the material up or we take it from fiction, I would strongly recommend that you treat the exercise as if it’s real. In other words, someone has come to you with a legal problem and they want your
advice. The exercise is artificial, you’ll say back to me, because of the time constraints. Typically in the real world you’re going to have more time than an hour or two to resolve a difficult legal question and that’s — that’s true.
You usually will have more time, but not always. There are plenty of times you’re going to be asked for your advice quickly and you’ll have to give written advice that you may have to prepare quickly. The other thing too for you to understand is that the kind of writing that you’re doing on your exams mirrors writing that you do in the real world, if you will. So the kind of memorandum that you’re being asked to write — a memorandum that gives advice about the legal elements of the cause of action — that’s the kind of memo that you’ll write for colleagues, for partners that you’re
working for, for clients, for judges, for the file,
and so you’re frequently going to be doing this kind of analysis so what I would say to myself on an exam if I were you — and this is what I try to do —
is this is real. Somebody needs to know in 60 minutes: what is the answer to this question? And I’m going to give it my best shot.
I can’t give a conclusive answer, perhaps, but I can at least develop a good game plan for how to solve it. Okay, so now the question is: how do you do that? One thing, again, very basic is answer the question. Please be sure to identify the question that you’ve been asked. Typically the question will follow a fact pattern. On one of these essay-style exams that — that we’re discussing where the professor gives you a case and asks you to advise the client as to whether he or she has a cause of action, can charges be brought,
what are your defenses, okay. But — and identify the question and answer it. Have you been assigned a role?
Have you been asked to represent one party or the other? Have you been asked to be the law clerk for the judge? Have you been asked to be the lawyer for a legislature? You should take that role assignment
seriously. The professor hopefully was thinking
about it and why they allocated that question to you. And so take the assignment seriously and make sure that you answer that question. At the same time, and it’s here that I want to go back to my discussion or references before to legal analysis, you always want to be balanced and nuanced. So you’re going to be given an assignment. Say you’re asked in a criminal case to defend somebody who’s been accused of a crime. For you to give good advice, you have to take account of what the other side’s arguments are. You have to be nuanced.
You have to constantly second-guess yourself. So just as you’re taking the role assignment seriously, ask yourself before you leave the question: what would I say if I were being asked to represent the other side? You know I’ve just come up with what I think is a winning claim but what will my opponents say? What would I say if I were in my adversary’s shoes? So you want to go ahead and try to identify the strongest arguments on both side of the question. So again you’ve got a short period of time and typically when you’re given a case to resolve there’s going to be a number of issues embedded in it, right? We call these “issue spotting exams” and
you’re going to want to make judgments about the issues that you choose to
focus on. There will be some issues that are there but may be too trivial to be discussed and it’s a judgement call of which is trivial, which isn’t, and if you’re not sure you should of course go ahead and discuss everything, but professors are looking for you to make the judgement: which are the issues that I really would need to bear down on? Which are the issues that would be litigated?
That would give the judge pause? So, for example on a criminal case, if you can tell that the actus reus element is satisfied, you are told this defendant broke and entered the property of another at night, you’re told precisely that that element is satisfied, you can — you don’t need to discuss it.
You can pass over it, okay. There will be other issues that are less trivial, probably not frivolous to bring up, but they may be marginal.
They’re not the most significant ones. So, at least on my exams — and I think this is true for many professors — though it’s here you should check.
You should find out what your professors
want. What I want you to do is to identify the questions in the case that are the most important. Which ones would give the judge an occasion to write an opinion? Which are the ones that the parties are not going to concede? Which are the ones where, oh, there’ll be a plea bargain over this issue but not this one, and I want you to focus on those issues. There what you want to do is to identify
the question. And more important than identifying the correct answer, what we want you to do is to identify the plausible answers and then articulate the arguments that get you to that answer. So what I remark students doing is: they’ll spot the question, they’ll know what answer their client
wants to arrive at. They’ll give me that answer,
then move on, perhaps doing the analysis of the facts but without explaining to me what would motivate a judge to endorse that answer versus the prosecutor’s answer. So just to give you an example from criminal law, if you have a case where you don’t know what the mental state element is, I think you all know what I’m talking about, if you approach a crime and you can’t tell from the face of the crime what’s the
culpability level, right? You then are going to be motivated, in representing your client, to adopt one culpability level over the other. The prosecution always want strict liability, right? And the defense always wants purpose or
specific intent, right? And you may be exactly right:
this is a strict liability element or this is a specific intent element but you don’t want to just provide that answer. Instead, what you want to do is to identify the arguments that you would make to a judge or to your colleagues or to your opponents for why it is that this statute should be construed to require a specific intent or purpose or — the rare exception — strict liability. So frequently I’ll see students, again, they’ll say, well my client has a mistake of fact claim and this is a general intent element and therefore the mistake has to be honest
and reasonable. They may be exactly right, this is a general intent element, but they need to explain to me: what’s the argument that got them there? Because the judge is going to be looking at the the statute, saying, I have no idea what this element is. Tell me. Tell me what are the arguments that get me to endorse one conclusion over the other. And then of course you have to take account of what the other side is going to say. So that’s the basic general advice.
The questions are important. So too are the answers. But because most of your exams are going to be testing you on questions as to which the professor thinks there is no clear answer, it’s a toss-up going in. It’s much more important that you identify the arguments that would motivate, as I said, a decision maker to endorse one answer over the other and, again, just because some judge concluded that this is the answer doesn’t mean that that’s the correct answer. They can always be overturned on appeal or another jurisdiction can disagree. The next thing that I want to say: I’m happy to talk in more detail about this analytical point with any of you. I’ve been talking to my own students about it when they’ve come to speak to me about their midterm exams and my impression —
I could be wrong — is that they’re finding it genuinely useful where I point to places. Where I say, look, here’s where you’ve given the answer and it’s great but that’s not what I want. What I want is the analysis that gets me there. So with that in mind what you need
to realize is that this type of law school exam privileges the people who
are willing to expound their analysis a little bit and at some point in your careers I am willing to predict that each of you will have so much experience and expertise and so much respect that you’ll be able to say to people: this is the answer and they’ll go, okay, but for the most part lawyers can’t do that. We’re always called upon to explain the
analysis that got us to that answer. And certainly at the beginning of a career. And then if you’re a judge you’re constantly having to justify your conclusions in written opinions and written texts. So that’s the thing again.
You want to expound. You want to unfold. Getting from A to Z really quickly is great but you’ve got to give some of the steps that got you there. The next question that comes up a lot is the line between doctrine — doctrinal analysis and policy or theory on the other hand and on the kind of exam that I’m describing — the kind of exam where you’re expected to identify what are the legal issues, what are the doctrinal rules that allow me to answer those issues and so forth — your analysis should not be on policy or theory in the first instance. And maybe you access it only briefly, if at all. It depends on the question and it depends on the professor. So what you’re being asked to do, as I suggested at the beginning, is to show that you’ve mastered a certain doctrinal content and you access policy sparingly if the professor asks for it or if the question lends itself to a policy analysis. And questions sometimes — perhaps
frequently — do and I’ll touch on that in a minute but be very sure that you want to stay close to the doctrine. Close to the ground.
Close to the rules. No matter what your professor has been doing in class. So even if you have a professor who comes in and tells you why every case in the case book is wrong because it doesn’t comport with the professor’s view of theory or policy or something like that it’s possible that you’ll need to access some of that policy or theory on the exam but if you’re given a case and asked:
evaluate this case, talk to me about the legal elements of the cause of action. Does your client win?
Does your client lose? What’s the measure of damages? You’ve got to first deploy the doctrine because even if your professor thinks those cases are unwise from a policy or a theoretical perspective that’s the law and that’s what you’re being expected to know, okay? So please start with the doctrine then, when appropriate, you can deploy the policy. You’ll know when you are being asked an open-ended policy question. You know, you’ll be given a description of a case and you’ll be asked, you know — you know, criticize the the underpinnings of this case. One of my exams — past exams that’s
on reserve — describes a federal court opinion on the law of attempt and then says to the students that the legislature doesn’t like that approach and you’re counsel for the legislature and you should recommend, you know, a new approach to the law of attempt. Clearly there, when recommending what the law should be, you want to be talking about the policy as
well as the doctrine. Sometimes, again, on criminal law exams —
I don’t know what other exams are like — I’ll ask students, in their role as prosecutors,
should you bring charges? And that question, of course, is going to import some policy analysis. In order to decide whether you should bring charges you first have to decide: can I — under the the principles of criminal law can I make a case stick? In good faith could I bring this prosecution? But then the “should” question is putting the normative question to you: is this a good — a wise case to bring?
A good — good use of resources? So there will be spaces to use policy. The other place where you use policy, if you have time, is where the law runs out, you know, if you have, again, a genuinely unclear — a question to which the answer is genuinely unclear and you want to push the answer in one direction or another you might mention some of the policies that might mention — that might get a
decision-maker to rule in your favor. But please keep your feet in the doctrine.
Start there and then check with your professors, okay? Look at their exams on reserve because occasionally you’ll discover that there’s a professor who perhaps asks nothing but open-ended policy questions. You can find that out before going in but the basic rule of thumb is to expect to apply the doctrine, at least on most of the questions. The next thing that I want to mention is that I’m frequently asked, should I be citing cases? Case names? And the short answer to that question is yes, you should be if you are able to learn in that way. Lawyers are constantly using precedents,
applying precedents, distinguishing precedents, trying to decide which line of cases is attracted by the case before you and so forth and using case names is a really great shorthand for your professor. It gives them confidence that you understand the material. And obviously you can just refer to the, you know, “Doe v. United States problem” and the professor instantly knows that you’re on the same page. The only cases you’ve learned are the cases in your case book. That’s the law for you for this exam.
You don’t know any other law, so just focus there. Learn those case names if you can.
If you can’t, you can still write a very successful exam. Some of us aren’t so good with absorbing names and the professors have read these cases so many times they’re like old friends. For you that’s not true! so if you’re someone who’s a little bit name-phobic don’t worry about it just make sure you’re able to deploy the principles that the cases represent. But if you can remember case names it’s a good idea. With that in mind you should be careful with commercial outlines if you find yourself needing to fall back on commercial outlines. And they can be very helpful, depending on the course and what’s going on in your study process. You won’t want to cite cases that the
professor never heard of before and because — because that — that can just
create, you know, confusion and problems for — for everyone. The next point that I want to make is the exams should contain no surprises in the sense that based on the law that you learned in that course you are equipped to answer every question. And here’s what I mean when I say it has no surprises. What would happen to me on law school exams is I would immediately focus on the context of the question and think, I don’t know that law. So on our contracts exam it was a contract relating to a wedding and I immediately thought, I don’t know the law of contracts relating to weddings and then ditto on the crim law exam there
was a crime that prohibited tattooing. I thought, I don’t know the law prohibiting
And of course not. You don’t know anything about that area.
Yeah, what you know is the law of contracts. What you know is basic criminal law principles. So just, again, take a deep breath, say, okay, this is a new context, I’ve never seen this statute before, I’ve never read about this type of tort or this type of contract before, but what I’m going to do is to fall back
on the general principles that I do know and ask the basic questions that I’ve
been taught that lawyers ask in any case of this kind. So again don’t panic.
And if there is a genuine surprise on the exam, you know, shame on the professor for trying to trick everybody and everybody’s in the same boat. So just, you know, again — I had this happen — just go out, good luck, I’ll just do what can! That happened to me on the bar exam but that — that’s — that’s — that’s — that’s not this lecture. The next — again, getting very close to the end, don’t cut and paste. So even when you’re allowed to have access to your outlines don’t cut and paste from your outlines. I’m — at least I can spot it a mile away.
And cutting and pasting — you’re just regurgitating. And all I can think of is a good example for how we react to it is the film Legally Blonde and if you haven’t seen Legally Blonde lately I absolutely recommend it. It’s staple for our law and film courses,
not joking. But in any event, if you’ll recall, Reese Witherspoon finally gets into court and the first thing she does is to give the judge a little treatise on the meaning of mens rea and the judge is kind of —
soon they’re going, huh. I mean the judge —
it has nothing to do with anything you know, it’s got absolutely nothing to do with anything and so she’s just regurgitating the content that she’s learned in a course that she thinks is relevant to this criminal trial. Ultimately she gets off that point, of course, and is highly successful but if you cut and paste your outline, it has that same feeling. “Criminal law requires proof of actus reus. Actus reus consists of bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla.” I know that, I’m glad that you know it, you don’t have time to tell me that. Instead, what you need to do is to identify a genuine actus reus problem on this new case and then evaluate it for me. So don’t cut and paste.
It’s a waste of your time, it makes us lose confidence in you and, depending on where you’re pulling your various sources from, because a lot of stuff goes into an outline, you can actually get yourselves into affirmative trouble by cutting and pasting so don’t do it much. Better to spend your time reading those facts and then doing a good job — don’t worry about doing a perfect job, just doing a good job — of sketching: here are the questions, here are the plausible answers and here are the arguments that get me where I want to go taking account of my opponent’s position. I just wanted to close with a very specific point for all of you about self-care during the exam and you all know about getting rest and taking care of yourselves. I have a more specific point in mind.
If you find yourself confronting some kind of emergency, whether you become very ill or you have a family emergency or something, please don’t feel that you need to go it
alone. You may be able to go it alone and, of course, you’ve got to draw the line
between, you know, sort of a trivial sniffle or cold and a serious illness, but once you’ve done that and you’re confronting some genuine crisis, problem,
emergency step up. Come to dean Ballinger or to one of your professors and ask for help. There are almost no mandatory deadlines in law. You probably know that, right? So most deadlines can be deferred, you know. Unless it’s a jurisdictional deadline in court you can always get an extension of time and if you’re sick, the best thing to do — or if you’re having a family emergency that’s making it impossible to get the work done — is to ask for help so that we can make an
adjustment for you before the fact. If you wait until after the fact it can be
really difficult to go back and undo things but there’s a lot of support here at the law school. We’re here for you.
I’m sure all of your professors around — I see a lot of my students here —
you know I’m around. Dean Ballinger — and — and again this is not the kind of thing that you should think
you have to tough it out and go it alone because lawyers going into court or
other places get extensions all the time. So take care of yourselves and ask us for help if you need it. So I think I’ll stop there and see what
your questions are. Yeah, I had to start writing very quickly.
I mean I think that’s why. So I think it’s — I think you want to spend some time developing a plan of attack. If you create an outline that’s written, I
advise my students to give me that outline because I will read an outline. And if there’s good things in the outline that don’t make it into the question I’ll be sure that you get credit for it. Some people need the outline format but I think it’s important to make, you know — make the transition from reading, thinking and outlining to writing as quickly as you can and yeah, I’m going to be — so I’m going to stick with that and be blunt about that. So as I mentioned before what gets valued on these exams is the student who expounds her arguments, who’s able to develop her arguments in some detail and with some nuance. Don’t provide just an outline. So I’m glad you asked that question and it focuses me on the outline problem. Occasionally a student, rather than giving me a prose answer, will give me just an outline and that’s usually very unsuccessful. If there’s an outline that accompanies, you know, a completed essay, I’m able to develop.
I can see in the outline, “oh this person saw …”
and I can give them a couple of points for that. But usually when you’re going through just bullet points, you know, here, oh, there’s a men’s rea issue it might be general intent or might be strict
liability, you’re not developing any of the nuance that needs to be there so it’s a difficult question you’re asking. It’s a judgment call and it depends on
your own way of thinking. For me writing and thinking go hand in hand so I had to start writing pretty quickly and hope and pray that I was on the right path and sometimes you’re not. Civil procedure, I walk down the wrong path saw that I was on the wrong path, thought oh, oh, goodbye correct path, you know, and had to say goodbye to the correct path and then move on and do another question, you know. That — that, you know, that was — I mean that happens. That’s going to happen. Some people need an outline before they
can get get started writing. My problem is if I outlined I never start writing.
Anyone else? I’m sorry, yeah, yeah. There is going to be some back-and-forth.
And you know, it’s going to depend. So I think that the most successful answers will take a position because that’s what lawyers have to do. You have to say to your client, you know I think you should plead guilty. I can make an argument for you that — that — that might lead you to litigate this case but sometimes you won’t be able to do that.
Now on an exam, the questions won’t be that simple to resolve. You won’t read it and go, |
plead guilty fella, right? You’ll read it,
instead identify the questions that — that you could plausibly bring If at the end of the discussion you come to a strong judgment one way or the other it’s wise to share that and frequently students will. They’ll say, you know, I’ve got a shot at persuading the judge that this element should be treated as a specific intent element, say, but you know what I think? That we’re likely to lose on that ground and if so then I’m going to be stuck with general intent or strict liability, you know, so I’m not optimistic about my chances. That’s fine.
Most important, and I think that’s good. it shows a kind of, I don’t know, just a thoughtfulness. A sense of commitment to the — the exercise. Very important, though, to develop the arguments on both sides. But again if you’re being asked: what do you advise the client? You know, what do you advise the judge?
If you’re being asked what do you advise the judge? You can’t go in and say, well maybe it’s this or maybe it’s that. At that point the judge is going to say, I should get a new clerk, right? Because I have to give jury instructions from the bench right now. In 30 minutes I need to be able to answer this jury’s question about the meaning of a particular crime. And so then you want to say, there are three plausible interpretations of this statute. Here they are.
I think the best one is — and then go for it. But you absolutely — you can’t give good
advice to anybody in our system without taking account of the other side because they’re just going to, as you know, come in and knock you over. Anything else? I’m trying to think about What I left out and I can’t think of anything — yes? it matters — um, it matters.
But with that said I think that the way I respond to that question is for you to think about who your audience is. And when I talk to my own students — and again, this is something that you want to get from your your own professors — is typically I want them to have me in mind as their audience or an educated consumer of this subject matter. So someone who knows something about it but who is genuinely uncertain about the difficult questions and wants advice. So I don’t mind if it’s a conversational tone if it’s very clear and, you know,
directly stated in plain language. I don’t need a lot of formality. I certainly don’t suggest that you struggle over individual words and try to craft a great memo. That’s not the job here, you know, later if you were going to embody it in an opinion letter for a client, a brief, an opinion for a judge, for the world,
then you would be working on the prose. The big thing is to try to bear down and clearly identify what the questions are. What the arguments are.
But your writing matters. So if you’re finding yourself struggling with that question: is my writing at the right level? I would suggest you go to one of your professors and just hand them a little, you know, question that you wrote up and see if they’ll read it for you.
Because I’ve had that experience with
students. The student came to me with —
a couple of years ago, several years ago — with an exam answer that he’d written under exam conditions and it was completely chaotic and jumbled. I mean it was just a disaster and I looked at it and I thought, this is not the time to be nice Anne Coughlin and I just said to him, you know, you’ve got to get this writing under control.
You know, everything’s here but I can’t follow it.
it’s just all over the place. And by finals he had done that.
And I’m not saying it’s due to my great
advice but I think it’s really good to run your writing by somebody you know and — and — and certainly my students have been doing that or I’ve been encouraging
them — a lot of them have been doing it.
Yeah, anything else? Yes. Yeah, right, your latter point is a really good one.
That’s the really wise thing to do. You can say, based on the fact pattern I can see that and whatever the actus reas is a satisfied. Of course, you want to be sure that you’re right on that front but sometimes you guys — you just are sure or you should be sure if you’re headed for lawyering. It’s just absolutely clear, you know, if I write a fact pattern “acting with the specific intent to murder his mother” you know, you’ve been told specific intent is satisfied so you could say, I can tell from reading the fact pattern that the parties have — there will be no significant issues with actus reus and therefore I am going to devote my time to X, right? The — this kind of move to signal that you’ve thought about it and you’re aware of it and then also merely by writing it down it might bring to your mind an occasion to second-guess yourself. Are you really that sure?
Because — because — because obviously the fact patterns aren’t going to be written in the way exactly that I said. So I think that’s a great idea to say that you’ve thought about it but you realize it’s too trivial to discuss. You’re going to move on to the more important questions. The other thing that people often want to know in criminal law that — this is just what occurred to me — is what to do when there are competing approaches to the same question. So, you know, if you studied the law of attempt there may be, you know, eight different ways to define actus reus and 15 different ways to define mens rea — just joking — but there’s at least six and then three, right? And what do you do if you have an attempt question? Do you apply all of them?
And the answer to that question may be yes. You do apply all of them. It depends on the question that you’ve been asked and what the ground rules are. So if the professor says to you you are working in a model penal code jurisdiction, okay. Then you don’t need to worry about common law concepts, right? Or if the professor says, you’re working in the common law or if you can tell by the face of the statute that you’re in one world versus the other, then you can feel confident to just go ahead and apply one approach but frequently you’re being located in a fictional jurisdiction. Law is the law you studied and the law you studied in a class is full of conflicting approaches, just as any given state may be.
There may be conflicting appellate approaches to the same question, right? Hasn’t yet been resolved by the Supreme Court. So if you’re in that hypothetical jurisdiction and you don’t know, is this a majority approach jurisdiction or a minority?
Is it common laws at MPC? Then your task may be to apply both but only if they matter, If — if they both come out in the same place you may not have to spend too much time on the analysis. Anything else? Everyone good?
I hope you have a wonderful holiday really good break. Thank you so much for coming, thanks.
We are building a new Bolivia. The United States influences other states, in order to achieve its objectives. They will surely declare Bolivia as a threat to the national security of the United States, I’m telling you in advance, as they did with Venezuela. We study the deconstruction of history. We have never before felt so proud of being Bolivians. Today we are in Santa Cruz, at the anti-imperialist military academy. The only one in Latin America and in the entire world. And it has one goal: to combat imperialism. Let’s check it out. The fact that an anti-imperialist school exists at all is remarkable, but that one exists in Bolivia, is incredible. Bolivia was a country that was so dominated by the U.S., that just 15 years ago, its president – wasn’t even able to speak Spanish properly, or hide his North American accent. Bolivia is at a crossroads. In order to finance the counterpart funds… But then in 2005 something really unexpected happened. The Bolivian people elected Evo Morales: an indigenous, grassroots, socialist leader as president. He immediately began instituting profound economic, social and political reforms and set in motion a deep process of change within Bolivia, with the aim of building a new kind of society. The discriminated, the excluded, the oppressed: we have organised to free ourselves from internal and external domination. We are building a new Bolivia. Juan Ramon Quintana is the Bolivian Minister of Presidency and a key figure behind the establishment of the school as well as one of the leaders of Bolivia’s process of change. He remembers how Bolivia used to be. Bolivia was practically controlled from outside and the entire state security structures were submitted to the United States’ embassy. Ministers of state were practically appointed by the ambassador. The ambassador had the status of viceroy; it was as if we were living in a colony. The history of Latin America is the history of dependence, of interference, of intervention of the United States. Some people say: “why an anti-imperialist school for the armed forces?” You know why, because the armed forces since 1940 were the most imperialist actor. In order to be promoted to the higher ranks of the Bolivian army, it’s compulsory to take a course on anti-imperialism at the school. Toshiro Miki is a lecturer in geo-politics and allowed us to sit-in on one his lessons. Today we are going to have a class on the rise and evolution of United States’ imperialism. They even participated in the drafting of the current Japanese Constitution. One of the most controversial things, for example, is that it cannot invest more than one per cent of its GDP on the military. These are the kind of history lessons that I wish I was taught at secondary school. Imperialism and taught from a perspective which isn’t a one-sided, western point of view and this is the kind of thing that needs to be taught not just in Latin America but in the whole world, especially in Europe. Helena Argirakis is the academic director of the school and is in charge of developing its curriculum. The anti-imperialist school studies imperialism and the mutation of imperialism. We study this through different disciplines: from sociology, history, economics, geopolitics, and we have an alternative way of analysing because we are coming from an epistemology of the South and the deconstruction of history. The anti-imperialist military school, was in part, founded to counter military training facilities, set up by the U.S. In the past there was the School of the Americas, a training facility for Latin American military personnel, which created dictators who violated the human rights of the Latin American people. The School of the Americas, now known as WHINSEC, the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security and Cooperation, was established to promote so-called democracy in Latin America. Libertad, paz y fraternidad: freedom, peace and brotherhood, and it’s a motto that’s readily apparent in everything that WHINSEC does. In actual fact it was – and continues to be – a military training facility with the aim of ensuring U.S. domination over the continent. Since its inception, it has produced some of Latin America’s most brutal dictators and death squads. Its alumni almost exclusively targeted popular mass movements, indigenous communities and leftist governments. Dubbed “the school of the assassins”, its training manuals – declassified in 1995 – promote the use of fear, beatings, false imprisonment and even execution ominously referred to as “neutralisation”. So it’s no wonder that among its roughly 64,000 graduates are people like Roberto D’Aubuisson, the person behind many of El Salvador’s death squads and Jose Rios the dictator responsible for the genocide of some 200,000 indigenous people in Guatemala. Two of the school’s graduates were also instrumental in the 2002 coup attempt against socialist Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez. The school continues to train soldiers from across the region – and with 8,000 graduates to date – the Colombian army has the largest number of WHINSEC trained soldiers, which Juan Ramon Quintana thinks is very relevant… Colombia is not a state, Colombia is in fact a North American colony. They have North American military bases, they have increased their military spending and they never finish fighting drug trafficking. Colombia has become an enclave, almost like Puerto Rico to facilitate North American domination. U.S. military bases and U.S. bought guns have played their part in the destabilisation of Latin America. But for Juan Ramon Quintana, it’s also ideological and cultural imperialism which needs to be overcome. Nine out of ten soldiers travelled to the School of the Americas, to be trained, indoctrinated and ideologised to support the North American military model. In other words, the Bolivian military were colonised, they were ideologised in a doctrine that was against the Bolivian people themselves. They preferred to speak English and forgot Quechua or Aymara, Tupi-Guaraní or Weenhayek. They taught us to despise the country, they taught us to hate the country because we are indigenous, they taught us to look at ourselves in the mirror and despise ourselves because of our indigenous origin. In Latin America, U.S.-intervention is not just an abstract concept that you read about in history books, it’s a real and ever-present threat. From coordinating military coups like the 1973 CIA-backed overthrow of democratically elected socialist president Salvador Allende, to the ongoing attempts to overthrow the elected government in Venezuela. Even humanitarian aid isn’t safe from western interests and Bolivians know this all too well. Until 2006, there was no territory, a piece of territory in which there was no North American presence, either through NGOs linked to the environment, to production, to health, no? Most of the NGOs, up to 1,000 of them, were funded by USAID or funded by North American foundations. They were posing as promoting environmental protection, but it was actually an excuse to explore the territorial potential and natural resources for future intervention for their foreign companies. USAID, an arm of the U.S. government with the stated aim of working “in support of American foreign policy” was expelled by Evo Morales’ government in May 2013. Today, USAID has missions in every continent on the planet, operating in over 100 countries. For Helena Argirakis, it’s this reality of overt and covert imperialism that is so important for the school to counter, not only with military strategy, but with education. That’s why I wanted you to visit the library because we have a collection that is quite different from what you can find in other libraries and is something new in the armed forces. It’s fundamental that the South American states and South American armed forces are prepared for the coming years, in political terms but also in terms of defense and security. The United States influences other states, in order to achieve its objectives. They will surely declare Bolivia as a threat to the national security of the United States, I’m telling you in advance, as they did with Venezuela. The problem is that this is the threat to the United States, that a country becomes independent, that it prospers, that it defines its future, that it develops its industry, that it owns its natural resources. Nowadays, the United States takes advantage of the submissive behavior of right-wing governments in Latin America that have resigned their dignity, their sovereignty and they have placed their people at the service of empire. This is the most shameful thing. It was necessary to distance ourselves from the United States to be able to consider a new model, our own project. We have never before felt so proud of being Bolivians. We will fight many battles, as we have already fought here in Latin America to prevent Latin America from becoming or from continuing to be, the United States’ backyard. Motherland or death! We will overcome!
>>MC: Well good evening everyone my name is Craig Smart, I’ll be your MC for this evening. I’m delighted to welcome you all on behalf of Curtin University, hear more about the industry lead course, of course the master of Predictive Analytics. Something new, something pretty exciting. This evenings event will give you an opportunity to hear from industry as well as from academics, it’s a nice marriage of the two domains. So to kick off I’d like to welcome up to the stage the Pro Vice Chancellor for Science and Engineering Professor Andris Stelbovics if you could come forward, we’d love to hear from you.>>Andris: Right, good evening everybody. In the past fifteen years we’ve seen an enormous growth in the use of intelligent phones. If we go to a country like India, and I was in India three weeks ago, if you go into the poorest villages, the one thing you notice is no matter what the income or status of people is in India, that everybody’s connected, they’ve got a phone. So what we actually see is that the new generation of people on this planet are using devices in a very sophisticated way, to actually provide information which may really be of great benefit to you as a business owner. The service that they are actually providing is actually benefiting us all. So if you’re in the audience tonight as a parent or a prospective student I strongly recommend this degree to you.>>MC: Thanks Andris. And I think it’s fair to say that to “innovation” has been a catchword for the Curtin University for a long time. And this is a good example of that happening, this marriage between science and engineering and the world of business. So without further ado, I’ll ask Tony Travaglione to come forward and speak to us briefly about the, I guess the business dimension of the master Predictive Analytics. Thanks Tony.>>Tony: Just a little bit about the Business School. Our Business School more recently just been accredited internationally as a total business school by AACSB, which basically means we’re in the top 5% of business schools in the world, only about 5% business schools have that accreditation. Organisations have really needed to maximise their access to get the most of their assets. It allows you know that big data to be used and analysed to effectively maximise the assets and productivity. And you’ve seen the success of those mining companies for example, oil and gas companies that have been able to do that and remain in the market in a very difficult time. The other screen that the business school is associated with or primarily responsible for is the financial and investment predictive analytics. And again this is sort of an area that’s probably more readily understood in the business world and amongst your sort of general laymen in the sense that vast quantities of information allow financial markets to really effectively minimise risk and to maximise returns. That’s all I’ve really got to say and leave it to the experts later on to talk a little bit more about those particulars streams. But thank you very much.>>MC: Thanks Tony. Now to move on I want to introduce our next speaker Mary Hackett, is the regional director of GE Oil and Gas. Mary joined GE in November 2014 from Woodside so very reputable firms, where she was senior vice president for the Australian Oil Business Unit. And in her 17 years with Woodside, she held a number of senior leadership roles including Project Manager of the Pluto Expansion, Engineering Services Manager and Facilities Engineering Manager And obviously well-known names is well placed to discuss the impact of smart technologies and data analytics to industry. So if I can ask Mary Hackett to come forward, we’d love to hear from you.>>Mary: To be honest and I’m just so excited when Andris talked about this course and the work Brian told me about it, unbelievable. And I seriously think WA, Curtin is going to put WA on map with something like this because it’s incredibly important. I think the reason that we’re lagging consumers is because it has to be a deep personal passionate need and it has to be a well-understood need. And that’s why a course like this is really important to match industry with students to really get that deep learning and find out where the true needs are. Because it’s not always immediately obvious. So I’ll just give you an idea of where GE has worked across its whole spectrum of delivery. So GE works in healthcare, works in power utilities, so across the full gambit. So it gives them the power to really leverage the ecosystem.>>David: I want to ask you a couple of questions. You know what’s the probability of having a little weather event, the sun bouncing off something that causes a traffic accident on the freeway. And therefore what’s probability of being able to work out how much time it takes to get emergency services out there. We need an ambulance, we need a policeman. And how many policemen do we need out there and how many ambulance crew do we need out there? These questions, so what is predictive analytics? Can we tell the future? No. But it can tell us a lot about what may, what might, what’s probable and was improbable to happen, and we can start allocating resources accordingly. So when we talked about the traffic accident and all the other things that went on from that imagine that you actually were working for government and strategic planning area and someone came to you and said “You need to tell me how much I need to spend over the next 10 years in this area.” So what do you do? Predictive analytics is very good at looking backwards and looking forwards, but it’s only based on the facts and data that you know. We need to try and integrate our thinking to look at things that might happen now and how they affect our future. And predictive analytics is more than the maths. It’s about using your brain power to interpret what you see and build on that in ways that people just aren’t thinking of at the moment. And that’s the power of predictive analytics.>>Tom: I remember going to a presentation, most part of an event that Woodside were running and there was a presentation given about the use of technology in managing assets better within Woodside. And there were a couple of examples given from the electricity industry, where we said “Actually they are much further ahead than we are in the oil and gas industry” in terms of how they go about using condition monitoring data and so forth to make better decisions about the management and maintenance and so forth of those assets. So what we started to say was “Well actually, no, perhaps focusing down in industries isn’t the right way to go.” So whilst the oil and gas industry undoubtedly right now is facing a lot of challenges because of the downturn in the market, the fall in the price of crude oil, and the knock on effect that it’s had in the gas markets. But actually when we think about the problems that we’re trying to solve, they’re very much across multiple industries. But undoubtedly these are sorts of skills that are going to be extremely relevant to businesses here in WA. I have absolutely no doubt about that.>>Brian: I’m in the petroleum engineering sector and as Mary explained it’s clearly apparent that there needs to be a lot more automation both within that energy sector but also in the mining sector. We hear about talk of automated trucks driving around mine sites but hey, there’s a big process plant in there that is not automated at all, has total manual labor governing it, much as many of the oil and gas process trains have offshore platforms in Western Australia. Offshore there is only one platform believe me in the order of 60 platforms only one is fully automated. In the North Sea there’s only one platform automated and yet there are 400 platforms. And we need in the resources industry the scientists, the engineers and the data analysts, the people who make sense out of the data, that is collected to be used in a common-sense situation to make companies leaner and produce and basically a greater profit margin. That’s what turns industry, keeps industry going. That’s what keeps the economy going and jobs.>>Ling: As you can see, that’s to do with the predictive analytics obviously we deal with data. We get data, we clean the data, we manage the data and then the security of the data and how to understand and basically how to understand and to draw conclusions, make predictions based on them. That’s what you need the computing people to do and that’s what we actually want to offer in the course as well. A big part of the course, basically the first year of the course, majority of the contents will be on how to deal with the data.>>Felix: So I work for the School of Economics and Finance at the Curtin Business School. I was trained as an econometrician so part of my role is to sort through thousands, if not millions of data points and try to make some sense of it. And over the last ten, twenty years, what we see is this increasing of that abilities of really really good quality data. So what got me excited about this is the ability to be able to sort through all those complex relationship between the financial market and our economy and then make some sense out of that. And potentially project into the future, allow us to make better decisions and management and either from our personal wealth persoective as well as even one of those policy role that be able to do policy, that be would be more robust to perhaps the latest global financial crisis.>>MC: So thank you everyone and I hope to see some of you on campus perhaps in the not-too-distant future, thank you very much.
I’m Adrian Jones Year 6 teacher at Jenner Park Primary School. Taking place tomorrow is our extraordinary performance of Julius
Caesar in the Millennium Centre in Cardiff. There is a huge range of
abilities within the two classes it’s a mixture of Five and Six who have taken
it on board, from a very challenging area in many ways, they might never have gone to
theatres some of the children, so giving them the opportunity has been absolutely by far
the most rewarding thing. When I took on the project I didn’t necessarily think
it was possible – learning the lines huge huge challenge – once they’ve done that
funnily enough getting them to actually act, I didn’t find to be that
challenging because they’ve been extraordinary. Anything I’ve asked them
to do they want to do well so I’ve had incredibly high expectations but they’ve
wanted to hit them – it hasn’t been ‘that sounds a bit like hard work sir’ it’s
been ‘okay right tell us what to do and we’ll get there’. I know tomorrow night
we’re gonna have parents that are just absolutely wowed by what their children
are achieving and that’s what the whole process is about – is just to show what
these incredible children achieve when they’re given the right level of
challenge. Just finished the dress rehearsal, I was
over the moon I think to see it in its full glory and to see the faces on the
school that were watching it was extraordinary. Epic – that’s the only word for it! Closest I’ve come to acting professionally is in class assembly which is nowhere near this! We got to see like how actors really do
it and we’ve experienced that feeling ourselves. I just want them to make their
parents proud and do it as well as I know they can. They deserve it, they really do. O Great Caesar! Speak hands for me! Et tu Brute? Then fall Caesar. And Caesar’s spirit shall with a monarch’s voice cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war! This was the most unkindest cut of all. Look you here, himself marred as you see with traitors O piteous spectacle! O noble Caesar! O traitorous villain! A most bloody sight. We will be revenged…Revenge! I’m feeling epic! Epic! I think Mr.Jones is feeling a bit tearful – it’s what happened last time we did this… It could not have gone better it really
couldn’t. I’m euphoric! I think we got across a true tragedy in a true drama in a
completely grown-up mature way. Today we done the best that we ever have done! The children deserved a good night and they
just absolutely smashed it they really did, couldn’t be more proud. Thrilled,
– My dad, he was the
telecommunications manager for Cambridge Fire Department. Growing up, I was able
to go into work with him and see, like, all the cool stuff he does. And that kind of inspired
me to get into tech. The first time I visited Champlain
College I fell in love. It was kind of like love at first sight. Coming on campus and seeing
all the beautiful buildings and beautiful Burlington made
me wanna keep coming back. I never really thought that
I can use my technical skills to help people. The first time I saw that
was at Champlain College and I got to see how
that could actually work. Duane Dunston, he’s really
shown me programming in a different light. We started on the You
Have a Voice project, which is working to identify
victims of human trafficking. We’re creating an expert system in order to identify these people. The application that we’re developing would be given to corrections systems and they can scan their files and then see if they have
anyone who might be a victim and provide them help that they need. I love going downtown on the weekends. Battery Street Jeans and
going thrift shopping. Going to my favorite coffee shop. My dream job will probably
be working for the UN and having a position that
helps real world issues. It’s really empowering, and I don’t think I would’ve been able to
have these experiences had I not been at Champlain College.
(soft ambient music) – All right, it’s 13 minutes. At 15, I say we leave. Sign in.
– Facts, facts, yeah. – Hello, I’m sorry I’m late. That’ll never happen again. Okay, welcome back to another year at this
illustrious institution. As you know, being at a
historically black college and university is a lot like
being surrounded by family. So I should say welcome home. Let’s get started with roll, shall we? Simone Fisk? – From Nashville, Tennessee,
music management major. (ding) By the way, $30 bottles, XXX, anyone? Ladies free until 11, but you know, doors open at 12. – Alright, that’s enough. Do we have Janette Spellmen here? – I’m from Atlanta, Georgia. (ding) I know some of you may not recognize me, but over the break I
decided to cut my hair. So now, you know, I’m team natural. – Oh, my God, I love your texture. What do you put in it? – Girl, I use a growth oil, coconut styler, and I use a blueberry pomade for my edges. – Marcus Gramley? Okay. No Marcus. (ding) Welcome to class. You’re late, what’s your name? – Meckenzie Howard, but I go by Mecka. – Could you give us your into. – I’m a fashion major
with a minor in marketing. (ding) And I’m from DC. Oh, and something about me… Oh, I modeled in New York
Fashion Week recently. – Okay, Mecka, please put your phone away. Who do we have next? We have a Michael Dillard? – My name is Michael X,
Dillard is my slave name. (ding) – X is a good, strong last name. Just spelled “X?” Just “X,” “EX,” or…? X, okay, cool, great. And who do we have? Oh, Mr. Cookman, welcome back. Good to see you again. We’re gonna get through it this time. – Hey, Professor Hamsen. (ding) – Alright, so as you
know, the syllabus reads that we start at Chapter 11, ’cause I know everybody got
the syllabus and read it. (ding) So, what’s gonna happen is, we’re gonna have a test every week, a paper every week,
keep those skills sharp. Let’s begin, any questions? Good, I don’t like questions. Let’s go. (soft ambient music)