Skip to main content

Exemplar Student Work

These are examples, not required answers. They show what clear, fair, age-appropriate legal thinking can look like.

1. Sample Case Notes Entry​

Date: Week 2
Rule or system I noticed: The shared snack shelf at our after-school room.
Type: rule and commons
What happened: Someone kept taking the last granola bar and not replacing it.
What I think the rule was for: So everyone gets a fair chance at shared snacks.
My ruling or conclusion: We need a rule that whoever takes the last snack writes it on the list.
Possible rule update: Put the grocery list next to the snack shelf.

2. Weak vs. Strong Rule​

  • Weak rule: "Be respectful."
  • Strong rule: "During planning meetings, speak one at a time and do not interrupt while another member is answering a question."

Why the stronger version works: it is easier to check, easier to teach, and easier to enforce fairly.

3. Weak vs. Strong Contract Clause​

  • Weak clause: "Clean the table and get extra screen time."
  • Strong clause: "By 7:00 PM on Tuesdays and Thursdays, Party A clears the craft table, wipes the surface, returns markers to the bin, and throws away scraps. In exchange, Party B gives Party A 20 extra minutes of screen time on Saturday."

4. Sample Household Agreement Clause​

If the supply shelf is organized but the shared table is still messy, the cleanup task is not complete until the table is wiped and the markers are returned to labeled bins.

5. Sample Loophole Audit​

Rule: No snacks in the reading tent.
Intent: Keep the space clean and bug-free.
Loophole: A smoothie in a closed cup is technically not a snack.
Rule update: No food or drinks other than water in sealed bottles in the reading tent.
Ethics note: The loophole is clever, but it still defeats the clean-space purpose.

6. Sample Precedent Decision​

Case: Student rolls through the hallway on shoes with wheels.
Earlier precedent: Scooter use was banned because the rule was interpreted to cover fast rolling movement in crowded hallways.
Ruling: The wheeled shoes are also banned.
Reasoning: The earlier ruling focused on hallway safety and uncontrolled speed, not on whether the object was called a scooter.

7. Sample Micro-Charter Section​

RIGHT 1: The Right to Quiet Setup Time.
Any member using the project table for building or drawing gets 15 minutes of uninterrupted setup before anyone may ask to borrow materials from that space.
Why this exists: constant interruptions make shared project space unusable.

8. Sample Amendment​

Amendment Title: Definition of "member"
Old gap: Weekend guests were using the shared room but were not clearly covered by the Charter.
New text: "Member" means any person using the room for more than 30 minutes with the knowledge of a regular member.
Reason: The old text did not say whether guests had to follow the same cleanup rules.

9. Sample Mock Trial Written Ruling​

Facts found: The responding person used the shared project shelf during the complaining person's reserved time and did not ask first.
Rule applied: Rule 2 of the Project Shelf Charter: "Reserved slots must be honored unless both members agree to a change."
Ruling: The complaining person should win.
Reasoning: The shelf was reserved, the responding person knew it, and there was no agreement to change the schedule.
Remedy: The responding person restores the materials and gives the complaining person the next open slot.
Gap note: The Charter should define how schedule changes are recorded.

10. Sample Appeal Request​

I am asking for review because the fair-hearing steps said both sides would see all evidence before the hearing, but the screenshot used in the ruling was shown for the first time during the hearing.
I think this mattered because I would have explained the missing earlier messages if I had seen the screenshot sooner.
I am not appealing just because I lost. I am appealing because the process step about evidence sharing was skipped.
Project title: Clearer Quiet-Zone Signs for the Library Makerspace
Audience: Kids, caregivers, and visitors using the room
Main claim: The current sign explains what not to do, but it does not explain why the quiet zone matters or where collaborative talking is okay.
Evidence: Two photos of the current sign, one librarian comment, and one observation note from a busy afternoon
Fairness note: Some visitors need to talk quietly to translate instructions or use AAC, so the new sign points people to both quiet and collaborative areas.
Attribution note: Sign photos by our class. Library quote used with permission.