NextGen Performance Tasks

What a performance task measures

The NextGen UBE includes one performance task in each of its three sessions. These tasks assess lawyering skills through an assignment built around a file and legal materials. Depending on the prompt, the work may involve legal research and writing, issue spotting, client counseling, investigation, negotiation or communication.

The task tests whether a candidate can use provided information to solve a practical problem. It is not simply a timed essay on a memorized subject. The file may contain useful facts, disputed information and distractions, while the legal materials supply rules to interpret and apply.

A practical workflow

1. Read the assignment and identify the role, reader, requested document and decision to be made.
2. Check the time available and divide it among reading, analysis and drafting.
3. Scan the file for a timeline, parties, claims, goals, disputes and missing facts.
4. Read legal sources for rules, conditions, exceptions and relevant holdings.
5. Build an outline linking each issue to authority and supporting facts.
6. Draft in the requested voice and format, using headings to guide the reader.
7. Review for completeness, accuracy and direct answers to every instruction.

The assignment controls the response. A memorandum for a supervising lawyer may state legal uncertainty and counterarguments. A client letter should explain options and practical consequences in accessible language. A negotiation plan should identify interests, alternatives and information gaps. Do not use one template for every product.

Use the file carefully

Read documents for facts that change the legal analysis. Record who created each document, when, and whether it is firsthand, hearsay, disputed or incomplete. The file may include a client account and an opposing account. Preserve differences and explain what evidence would resolve them.

Separate legal significance from narrative vividness. A long email may contain one crucial date; a short contract clause may control the issue. Note facts supporting and undermining each position. This balanced record helps avoid overclaiming and prepares a useful recommendation.

Use assigned law accurately

Read authorities for the rule's elements and limits. In a statute, review definitions, scope, exceptions and effective dates. In a case, identify the holding and why particular facts mattered. Cite or name the assigned authority clearly enough that the reader can trace the conclusion.

Do not invent law or rely on outside rules when the packet supplies controlling materials. If sources conflict, examine hierarchy and later authority. If the materials leave a question open, state the uncertainty and explain what additional research or fact would be needed.

Write for the reader

A useful response starts with the conclusion or immediate recommendation, then explains the rule and application. Use short headings that match the assignment. Address the strongest opposing argument and explain why it does or does not change the result. Avoid long rule dumps and unsupported conclusions.

For a client-facing response, translate legal consequences into choices: what can be done now, what deadline matters, what risk remains, and what information is needed. Avoid guaranteeing an outcome. For an internal memo, distinguish a likely result from an uncertain issue and show the reasoning that supports both.

Time and quality controls

A polished first paragraph is less valuable than a complete response. Reserve drafting time and a final check. If the file is large, use the assignment to prioritize. If stuck on a minor issue, state a reasoned position and continue. On review, check that every task is answered, every legal proposition has source support, and every factual assertion comes from the file.

Practice under the current three-hour session format. Track whether the bottleneck is reading, source extraction, issue selection or writing. Fix one process problem at a time. Feedback should explain what made a response effective and what the candidate can change, not simply provide a model answer to memorize.

Practice scenario

A supervising attorney asks for a short memorandum on whether a client can terminate a services agreement after repeated missed deliveries. The file contains a contract, delivery logs and emails. A statute supplies notice requirements. A good response identifies the termination clause and statutory condition, builds the delivery timeline, evaluates the significance of written notice, and recommends next steps. It notes any conflict in the records instead of assuming the client can terminate immediately.

Turn the assignment into a deliverable checklist

Before reading deeply, identify your role, audience, document type, questions to answer and any requested recommendation. Convert each instruction into a checklist item. If the assignment requests both an analysis and draft language, both must appear. If the reader is a client, explain consequences plainly; if the reader is a supervisor, identify legal uncertainty and counterarguments.

Suppose the assignment asks whether to accept a settlement and to prepare a short client letter. A memo about liability alone misses the task. Analyze the offer, possible recovery, costs, uncertainty and client's goals, then communicate the options in the requested letter. Do not let legal analysis crowd out the decision the client must make.

Triage the file and library efficiently

Use the assignment to prioritize documents. Scan the file for parties, dates, objectives, disputed facts and likely issues. Read the library for the rules that answer the assignment, noting authority and limits. Return to the file to connect each element to supporting and contrary facts. Avoid treating every document as equally important or reading a long source before knowing which issue it addresses.

A short email may establish a critical notice date; a long client chronology may contain one unsupported conclusion. A statute may control the issue, while a case explains how the term applies. Keep a source chart that records what each item proves and what it cannot prove.

Draft a practical recommendation from the analysis

A useful product begins with the answer or recommendation. Explain the rule and apply the most important facts. Address the strongest adverse fact or authority. If uncertainty remains, state the additional fact or research needed and how it could change the result. The reader should know what to do next after reading the response.

For a client letter, use a short explanation of the legal position, the available options, benefits and risks, and a concrete next step. Avoid unexplained terms such as “summary judgment” or “specific performance.” For a negotiation plan, identify the client's interests, priorities, alternatives and information to obtain before making a concession.

A worked task example

A supervising lawyer asks whether a client can terminate a services contract after three missed deliveries. The file contains the agreement, delivery logs, a warning email and the supplier's response. The library provides a material-breach test and a notice-and-cure rule. First identify the requested product and whether the lawyer wants a neutral recommendation or draft client advice. Then build a timeline: due dates, actual deliveries, notice, response and any cure.

Next, read the contract and authority for the termination condition. Evaluate whether the repeated delays meet the material-breach standard, whether the warning satisfies notice, and whether the supplier received an opportunity to cure. Consider the supplier's response and any client conduct that contributed to delay. Recommend termination only if the legal and factual conditions support it; otherwise advise what evidence or additional notice is needed. Draft the requested product in the proper voice.

A weak response would state that three missed deliveries automatically permit termination without addressing the clause, notice or cure. Another weak response would summarize every source but never recommend a course. The task requires applying the supplied law to the client's particular record.

Protect time for a complete response

Set a reading cutoff and a drafting start time. If the packet is large, prioritize the assignment, core authorities and facts tied to each element. Do not spend most of the task extracting every possible rule. A concise complete product is usually more useful than one polished issue followed by unanswered instructions.

Reserve a final review for task compliance, legal accuracy, source support, names and requested format. Confirm that each instruction is answered and that the conclusion follows from the analysis. If time is short, complete every requested part at a clear level before polishing a sentence.

Review skill failures separately

After practice, classify whether the problem was task reading, source selection, rule synthesis, fact evaluation, organization, tone or time. Then practise the weak step on a new file. If you ignored adverse evidence, use a balanced fact chart. If the product did not answer the assignment, create a checklist first. If the writing ran long, outline the recommendation before drafting.