IRAC for Problem Questions vs Discursive Law Essays

Law school assessments generally fall into two broad categories: problem questions and discursive essays. Each requires a fundamentally different approach to legal writing and analysis. Understanding these distinctions is a key part of preparing for assessments, as applying the wrong structure to a question will limit your ability to demonstrate the required skills.

Problem questions present a hypothetical factual scenario and ask you to advise one or more parties on their legal position. They test your ability to identify relevant legal issues, state the applicable law, and apply that law to the specific facts provided. Discursive essays, on the other hand, ask you to critically evaluate a legal concept, policy, or academic debate. They test your ability to construct a coherent argument, weigh competing perspectives, and reach a reasoned conclusion.

A common way to structure an answer to a problem question is by using the IRAC method. This framework ensures that you address all necessary components of legal analysis in a logical and systematic manner. IRAC stands for Issue, Rule, Application, and Conclusion.

First, you identify the specific legal Issue raised by the facts. Next, you state the relevant Rule of law, citing appropriate statutes or case law. The most critical step is the Application, where you explain how the rule applies to the specific facts of the scenario. Finally, you provide a brief Conclusion summarising the likely legal outcome for the party involved.

It is important to remember that the Application section is where the majority of marks are typically awarded. Simply stating the law without applying it to the facts demonstrates only basic knowledge, not the analytical skills required of a competent legal advisor.

Unlike problem questions, discursive law essays do not involve advising a party on a factual scenario. Instead, they require you to engage critically with a legal topic. The structure of a discursive essay should be thematic, driven by a central thesis that you establish in your introduction and defend throughout the body of your work.

A strong discursive essay moves beyond descriptive writing. It involves critical evaluation, which means interrogating claims, assessing the strength of different arguments, and considering plausible alternatives [2]. You must support your reasoning with appropriate authority, such as case law, statutory provisions, and academic commentary, while maintaining a clear and logical flow of ideas.

When structuring your essay, ensure that each paragraph focuses on a single main point that contributes to your overall argument. Use clear topic sentences and transition smoothly between paragraphs to guide the reader through your analysis.

The primary difference between problem questions and discursive essays lies in their objective. Problem questions are practical exercises in legal problem-solving, requiring you to apply established law to specific facts. Discursive essays are academic exercises in critical thinking, requiring you to evaluate the law itself, often considering its historical context, policy implications, or potential for reform.

Structurally, problem questions follow a rigid, linear framework (like IRAC) for each legal issue identified. Discursive essays require a more flexible, thematic structure that allows for the development of a nuanced argument over several paragraphs. While problem questions focus on the application of rules, discursive essays focus on the critical evaluation of those rules and the principles underpinning them.

Understanding these differences is essential for effective exam preparation and coursework writing. Attempting to use the IRAC method for a discursive essay will result in a descriptive and poorly structured answer, while failing to apply the law to the facts in a problem question will demonstrate a lack of practical legal skills.

A common mistake in problem questions is spending too much time stating the law and not enough time applying it to the facts. Students often write lengthy descriptions of cases without explaining how those cases relate to the scenario at hand. Remember that the application is the most important part of your answer.

In discursive essays, a frequent pitfall is writing descriptively rather than critically. This involves simply summarising the law or listing different academic opinions without evaluating them or integrating them into a coherent argument. To achieve high marks, you must demonstrate your own critical voice and reach a reasoned conclusion based on the evidence you have presented [2].

Another significant issue is poor structure. Whether you are answering a problem question or writing a discursive essay, your work must be logically organised and easy to follow. Use clear headings, signposting, and transition words to guide the reader through your analysis.

Legitimate law tutoring can provide support in developing your legal writing skills. A tutor can offer formative feedback on your drafts, helping you to refine your structure, clarify your arguments, and improve your application of the IRAC method. They can also guide you on how to demonstrate critical analysis in your discursive essays.

It is crucial to understand the ethical boundaries of tutoring. Legitimate support focuses on empowering you to independently complete your work. A tutor must not write, rewrite, or heavily edit your assessed work, nor provide model answers for specific assignments. Such actions constitute contract cheating, which is a serious academic offence [1].

By working with a tutor ethically, you can enhance your understanding of legal concepts and develop the analytical skills necessary for your law degree, while strictly adhering to university academic integrity policies. You must check your institution's current rules before sharing assessed work because permissions vary.