Use “Because” Often, But Use It Correctly
The word “because” should be generously used in your essay responses because the word forces you to explain your position, argument, conclusion, etc.
It prevents you from being conclusory—i.e., stating a position without factual support—and it preempts the examiner from asking “why.” Conclusory statements and responses will receive little to no credit.
The word “because” wonderfully connects rules to specific facts and prevents you from being conclusory.
That’s worth repeating: The word “because” wonderfully connects rules to specific facts and prevents you from being conclusory.
It’s important to note that it’s not enough that you simply incorporate specific facts in your analysis. Weaker essay responses are those responses whose analyses simply include a recitation of facts. Examiners won’t give you credit simply for copying information that’s already given to you in the MEE or MPT testing materials. Examiners are assessing your ability to articulate how you reach conclusions based on the specific facts in light of the legal principles you identified as relevant in your rules section. Examiners aren’t assessing your ability to copy information, devoid of any explanation or connection to the rules. You’re taking a bar exam, not a transcription test.
So, this is a reminder to use the word “because” early and often in your bar exam essays.
But this is also a reminder to use the word “because” appropriately—as a conjunction to make the connection between a rule and specific facts. (As a side note, sure you can also make use of the words “as” and “since.” But during a stress-filled, high-stakes testing environment when you have only 30 minutes to read, examine, and write a response, you want to incorporate that muscle memory you’ve developed during your bar preparation. And it’s much easier to adopt and then incorporate a rather bland but complete template like “[insert element] + [insert exists/doesn’t exist] + because + [insert specific facts].”
Now, if you’re paying attention, I’ve used the phrase “specific facts” several times in the above discussion. This is important: To maximize points on the bar exam, incorporate and explain the legal significance of specific facts provided to you in the test question. To help you do this, think about drafting an essay response for someone who hasn’t read the test question. If you know the reader doesn’t have the benefit of already knowing the underlying facts on which your analysis is based, that should force you to be more thorough in your incorporation and discussion of specific facts.
Below are some examples of conclusory statements, as well as examples how those conclusory statements can be strengthened by using the words “because” as a conjunction to incorporate specific facts.
Conclusory Statements | Weak Use of “Because” + General Facts | Strong Use of “Because” + Specific Facts |
The assistant committed criminal possession of stolen property. The assistant knew or reasonably should have known that the figurine was stolen. | The assistant committed criminal possession of stolen property. The assistant knew or reasonably should have known that the figurine was stolen because of its price. | The assistant committed criminal possession of stolen property. The assistant knew or reasonably should have known that the figurine was stolen because she purchased it under circumstances that would have informed an objectively reasonable person that the woman lacked the right to sell it. After all, the assistance offered to sell it for only $10 even though the tagged price on the figurine was $200. |
The woman intended to permanently deprive the homeowner of the figurine. | The woman intended to permanently deprive the homeowner of the figurine because she didn’t give it back. | The woman intended to permanently deprive the homeowner of the figurine because, shortly after taking it, she sold it to her assistant for cash. The woman committed theft when she took the figurine. |
The circumstances satisfy the actus reus element of the assistant’s crime. | The circumstances satisfy the actus reus element of the assistant’s crime because she possessed the lawn figurine. | The circumstances satisfy the actus reus element of the assistant’s crime because she acquired possession of the stolen lawn figurine after she purchased it from the woman. |
The consistent and frequent use of the word “because” as a conjunction and the incorporation of specific facts may be the difference between a good response and a great response.
Don’t think that, well, because you’re using the word “because” often that your analysis is automatically complete. What I’ve been noticing as I’m reviewing essays is that some graduates are misusing the word “because” in their analysis.
I tried to figure out why. I think I may have found one potential reason.
Each year, Merriam-Webster adds new words and definitions to its dictionary. Last year, it added more than 400 new words and definitions, including amirite, vaccine passport, and, my favorite, dad bod.
But Merriam-Webster also added a new meaning to the definition of “because.” The lone, previous definition for “because” was for its use as a conjunction, meaning “for the reason that” and “the fact that.”
However, Merriam-Webster now provides a new definition of “because” as a preposition. The dictionary states that “because” can be used as a preposition and is "often used in a humorous way to convey vagueness about the exact reasons for something." This use of “because” in this manner avoids delving into specific reasons. Examples provided in the new dictionary entry includes "the process works because science" and "they left because reasons."
But it’s the very lack of specificity in this new definition of "because" that makes the use of “because” in this manner inappropriate for the bar exam.
So, with all due respect to the folks at Merriam-Webster, ignore this tweak to the definition of “because” when developing your bar exam essay analysis. Amirite?
