Developing Effective Study Groups

1
Developing Effective Study Groups

• Collaborative Learning

2
The Purposes of a Study Group Are

• To clarify information
• To apply legal knowledge and reasoning to factual
  situations
• To test understanding through discussion and
  debate within the group.
• To practice writing exam questions.
• To give and receive feedback on practice exam
  answers.

3
The Purpose of a Study Group Is NOT

• To do the kind of internal review and processing
  that is best done independently
• To assign an outline to one member of the group
  for each class.
• To avoid work by talking about it rather than
  doing it!

4
How to Form a Study Group

• Seek 2 or 3 others
• Clarify goals about study groups activities
• Clarify time commitments
• Choose members on the basis of common goals and
  commitment to those goals.
• Do NOT form study groups primarily on the basis
  of friendship, similarity of thinking, or
  political conviction.
• All forms of diversity benefit the whole study
  group

5
Guidelines for Forming Study Groups

• Rotate leadership
• Role of leader is to involve all participants in
  discussion
• Set purpose and goals for the group.
• What types of activities does the group find most
  helpful?
• What do we expect the group to accomplish?
• At the end of each meeting set an agenda for the
  next meeting to help members focus and prepare

6
Timing Issues

• Establish set meeting times and expectations.
• Stick to a set time schedule.
• Make ending times clear.
• Schedule follow-up meetings, but dont exceed
  time limits.

7
Natural Learning CyclesInput Process - Output

• Input
• Gather information by
• Reading, listening, discussing, reviewing
• Process (Internal)
• Contexting, organizing, and storing information
  for future use
• Output (External)
• Apply to new situations
• Plan, talk, write
• Feedback/Revisions

8
Practice Problem Marys Garden

• Mary and Peter are neighbors. After Mary first
  bought her house, she discovered that her
  property lacked a sufficiently sunny space for
  the vegetable garden and greenhouse she wanted.
  However just across the property line, on Petes
  property there was a sunny space that was covered
  in weeds and perennially ignored by Peter. While
  Peter was on vacation in August 1987, Mary weeded
  and tilled a 20 foot by 20 foot area and put some
  plants in. When Pete returned, he noticed the
  encroachment and wasnt pleased. However he
  didnt want to cause ill will and so pretended
  not to notice. Almost immediately thereafter,
  Mary began to store her gardening supplies (a
  wheelbarrow, some shovels and rakes, pots and
  bags of mulch and fertilizer) next to the garden
  so that soon she was regularly using a strip of
  property that was 20 feet by 60 feet. Two years
  passed.
• Emboldened by her success with the garden, Mary
  decided to put in a small greenhouse adjacent to
  the 20' by 60' area, also on Petes land. She
  waited until Pete was out of town for the
  holidays in December 1989, and then had a builder
  friend come and help her to lay a foundation and
  construct a greenhouse. The construction took
  five days and cost Mary 1,600. Pete was very
  disturbed to find the structure on his return and
  confronted Mary, saying You know thats my
  property you put your garden and greenhouse on.
  And yes, I do mind. Mary was somewhat surprised
  and replied that she was sorry but she thought
  Pete didnt really mind or that he would have
  said something sooner. Pete simply replied Well,
  I do mind. Unsure about what else to do, he left
  it at that and avoided Mary for the next several
  weeks. Mary avoided going in the garden and
  greenhouse for several weeks.
• After a few weeks, Mary approached Pete and
  suggested that perhaps they could reach some
  understanding since the greenhouse was already
  there and the soil in the garden was now very
  well built up. Mary suggested that they could
  both end up better off if Mary continued her
  cultivation in the garden and greenhouse. She
  offered to share the vegetables and flowers from
  her garden with Pete as well as sharing the
  greenhouse. Pete muttered something about his
  property rights but neither objected nor
  assented. Mary returned to cultivating her garden
  and began planting seeds for spring in the
  greenhouse. Pete in fact only ventured into the
  greenhouse or garden once or twice and never
  mentioned the subject again.
• In November 1993, Pete contracted to sell his
  house to Sonia. Sonia did not have a survey done
  and was unaware of the encroachment until after
  the closing in January 1994. When Sonia met Mary
  that same month, she explained that she had
  learned that the greenhouse was on her property
  and she expected Mary to respect the boundary
  between their lots.
• Analyze Sonias and Marys rights, noting the
  arguments that could be raised on each of their
  behalfs. The jurisdiction in which the property
  is located applies a six year statute of
  limitations to actions to recover real property
  and interprets adversity/hostility to require
  intentional trespass.

9
Make a study group

• Please count off!
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• . . .

10
Using the Call of the Question and Relevant Rule
to Guide Analysis
11
(No Transcript)
12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
An A Answer Mary may have a claim to title of the
20 x 60 strip of land under either of two
doctrines adverse possession or improving
trespasser. She may also try to argue for rights
to the greenhouse, or at least to compensation
for the cost of constructing it, but only under
the latter theory because six years have not yet
elapsed from the time of the occupation of that
space. The basis for Marys adverse possession
claim is that she openly, notoriously,
exclusively, and adversely possessed the 20x60
strip of land for the statutory period (6 years)
from late 1987 until late 1993. The main issues
raised are whether her use was adverse and
whether it was exclusive. Mary would argue that
her possession was hostile in that she
intentionally trespassed B she knew it was Petes
land and she willfully occupied it meaning to
make it her own. Mary will argue that Petes
comments (Well I do mind) when he confronted
her confirmed her understanding that she was on
the property without Petes permission. Sonia
will argue that the use should be deemed
permissive and not hostile. Sonia will point to
the fact that Mary told Pete in their first
conversation that she had thought he wouldnt mind
her use (indicating she thought her entry was
with permission). Even if the initial entry is
viewed as hostile, Sonia will argue that the
compromise Mary proposed showed that she knew her
rights were subordinate to Petes ownership
rights, not in conflict with them. (This could be
argued by Mary to prove just the opposite
conclusion). Sonia will argue that at least after
Petes acceptance of her compromise, Marys use
should be viewed as permissive, thereby
interrupting the continuity of the adverse
possession before 6 years had passed. Some of the
same facts could be argued as relevant to the
issue of the exclusivity of Marys possession.
Mary would characterize her use as exclusive.
Sonia would argue that Marys offer to share the
use of the use of the property and Petes one or
two ventures onto the property should suffice to
interrupt the exclusivity of the occupation. This
is a close question. On the question of the
greenhouse, Mary will argue that Pete stood by
and failed to complain about her use of the land
and she relied on his silence to her detriment.
To prevent unjust enrichment, she should be
compensated. Hers is a weak argument. She took a
knowing risk by building on property that was not
hers. Unlike the Somervilles in Somerville v.
Jacobs, she was not innocent of the error. Her
knowledge of the property lines, and her
undertaking the construction while Pete was away
prove her intent to encroach. Therefore it is
unlikely it would order Sonia to convey the land
with the greenhouse to Mary in exchange for
payment for the land.
15
Agenda Choices

• Focus in meeting Make conscious choices
• One subject or more than one each meeting
• Stick to set subject or jump to course that
  provides current confusion
• Type of Focus
• Oral discussion
• Writing problems
• Remember that you get good at skills you practice
  and the exam is a written exercise!
• Try individually writing answers to a hypo and
  then trading answers.
• Construct a group answer pulling the best from
  each answer.
• Creating hypos is an excellent exercise for
  groups and for individuals to bring to the group.
• Take turns explaining and questioning

16
Tasks Change Over the Semester

• Beginning groups commonly clarify class notes,
  and quickly move to applying what they are
  learning to test their understanding.
• Dont put off planning and writing practice
  problems
• Easier to understand material by using concrete
  examples
• Try to create hypos in your group then vary the
  facts and see if or how that changes your
  analysis
• Organize materials individually, but
• Test your organizing by using your system in
  writing answers to hypos
• Trade answers, read, critique, discuss, and
  improve
• Before exams groups often meet frequently to do
  practice questions.

17
Study Groups
Try them!