Exam Instructions
CYS 2212F/G - 570/571 - Winter 2025
Sections 570/571 of CYS 2212G "Childhood and the Law" will hold three exams in 2025.
Test 1 = 1 hour test held on Tuesday February 11 in LH 105C starting at 8PM (15% of course mark)
Test 2 = 1 hour test held on March 4 (25% of course mark)
Summative Final Exam = 3 hour exam comprised factual question, identifying and explaining key concepts, and briefing cases. (35% of course mark)
Instructions for the Tests:
Preparation: Here are two exam preparations ideas: Flash Cards and Briefing Chart
Prepare flash cards and a briefing chart on the cases and concept covered in the readings and lecture. As we progress, you will construct a list for studying. There will be two parts to these tests.
The questions will be drawn from the key concepts and cases presented each week - which are themselves based on the lectures and the book.
1. Case Briefs. You will be asked to brief one of the cases we have mooted previously; you will not know which case will appear in your exam. You will provide (without notes) the 1) the procedural history and legally relevant facts, 2) the legal question(s), 3) the holdings of the court, 4) a summary of the majority's reasoning, and 5) significance of the decision. The brief you write will be worth 40% of the test.
The February 11 Test will cover the book through 4.03 (page 135); and the cases will be:
E. v. Eve [1986] SCC
Van de Perre v. Edwards [2001] SCC
Ellis v. Wentzell-Ellis [2010] ONCA
For the March 4 Test will cover the book through 5.05 (page 215); and the cases will be:
Van de Perre v. Edwards [2001] SCC
Ellis v. Wentzell-Ellis [2010] ONCA
Canadian FCYL v. Canada (AG) [2004] SCC
2. Identification and Significance. This will be worth 60% of the test. You will be asked to identify (define) and explain the significance of 6 'lecture terms and concepts' or 'exemplary cases' in no more than four sentences. These terms and cases are listed in the course schedule - and the tests will draw upon them summative to the point we have reached in the readings and lectures prior to the test.
Instructions for the Final Exam:
The Final Exam is worth 35% of your mark, it will be three hours in duration.
Preparation: You'll have to commit ideas and facts to memory, but the test questions and tasks will be drawn from the key concepts and cases presented each week - which are themselves based on the lectures and the book.
Here are two exam preparations ideas: Flash Cards and Briefing/Holding Charts
There will be three types of questions:
A. (24%) Short Factual Responses. Some of these may be true or false, matching, or fill-in-the-blank, but most are multiple-choice. There will be twelve of these, each worth 2%. They will all be draw from the key concepts list in the course schedule.
B. (36%) Long Answers identify. These will require that you (define) and explain the significance of major concepts, doctrines, statutes, and cases in no more than four sentences. There will be nine of these each worth 4%. At least three of these 9 will ask you about one of the 30 bolded cases; 6 or fewer will deal with the lecture 'terms and concepts' on the course schedule. The long answers will not require you to brief cases, but at least three of them will ask you to identify what an important (bolded) case was about and why it matters.
C. (40%) Case Brief summarize (without notes) the 1) the procedural history and legally relevant facts, 2) the legal issues or question(s), 3) the holdings of the court, 4) a summary of the majority's reasoning, and 5) significance of the decision.
You will be given three cases (out of the 6 we focused upon) and will be asked to write two case briefs from memory. They will each be worth 20% of the exam. For the 2025 version of this course, they are the following:
1. E. v. Eve [1986] SCC
2. Van de Perre v. Edwards [2001] SCC
3. Ellis v. Wentzell-Ellis [2010] ONCA
4. Canadian Foundation v. Canada [2004] SCC
5. R. v. Kaija [2007] ONCA
6. Blackwater v. Plint [2005] SCC
Unlike briefs you will prepare weekly, your exam case brief's must be written in complete sentences without the use of your notes or other sources. As a result, students may only lightly explain the reasoning of the holding in broad strokes. On the other hand, there is a high expectation that you will be able to explain the significance of the decision. This is because the complexity of 'legal reasoning' is much more difficult to reconstruct from memory without notes, but you should be able to name and explain the significance of the holding without notes because this is a matter of comprehension.