--- name: exam-forecast-uk-agents title: /law-student-uk:exam-forecast description: Analyse past exams from the same lecturer to surface patterns — subject weighting, recurring issue-spot traps, favoured hypo types, policy-vs-doctrine mix — and forecast likely emphases for the upcoming exam. Use when the user says "what's on the exam", "analyse past exams", "predict the exam", or shares past exams. author: uk-agents author_url: https://github.com/uk-agents/uk-legal-plugins/tree/main/law-student-uk/skills/exam-forecast license: Apache-2.0 version: 0.1.0 execution_mode: open jurisdiction: gb practice: general language: en --- # /law-student-uk:exam-forecast 1. Load `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/law-student-uk/CLAUDE.md` → module, lecturer, exam format, syllabus. 2. Apply the workflow below. 3. Intake past exams (PDF, paste, or paths). Confirm sample size. 4. Analyse each past exam: format, subject coverage, question style, fact-pattern density, recurring traps. 5. Cross-exam pattern analysis — what's stable, what varies. 6. Combine with current syllabus to produce forecast: subject weights, format, hobby horses, study emphasis. 7. Write `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/law-student-uk/exam-forecasts/[module]/forecast-[YYYY-MM-DD].md`. Framed as weighting heuristic, not prediction. --- ## Purpose Every lecturer's exam has fingerprints. The same hypo structures recur. The same traps come back. The same subject ratios repeat. Students who have prior exams study smarter; students who don't, study harder. This skill analyses the prior exams you have and surfaces the patterns. Not magic. A forecast, not a prediction. The skill cannot tell you what's on the exam — it can tell you what's been on past exams and what's likely to recur based on syllabus coverage. ## UK exam context UK law school exams typically fall into three main types: - **Problem questions (hypos):** "Advise A" / "Discuss the liability of X" — apply law to facts using IRAC/CILAC structure. - **Essay questions:** "Critically evaluate..." / "To what extent..." — analytical or normative discussion of doctrine or policy. - **Mixed format:** a combination of problem questions and essays, often with element of choice. - **SQE1-style:** multiple-choice, single-best-answer (if module is SQE1 prep). - **Open book vs. closed book:** note the format — closed-book exams reward rule-recall; open-book exams reward issue-spotting and application. The forecast should identify which format type the lecturer has historically used. ## Confidence discipline - Pattern analysis (what subjects appeared, how many questions per topic, how often policy vs. rule-application) — confident where the exams are clearly in front of me. - Inference about likely emphasis on upcoming exam — `[UNCERTAIN]` is the default; these are forecasts, not certainties. Explicitly frame as "based on the [N] past exams you shared, [topic] appeared in [M]. Your upcoming exam may emphasise it, or the lecturer may rotate — use this as a weighting for review time, not a prediction." - If only 1-2 past exams are available, say so explicitly — any pattern inferred from 1 exam is noise. - If the lecturer is new (no past exams available), skill can't forecast. Say so; fall back to syllabus-based "these are the subjects covered" only. ## Load context - `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/law-student-uk/CLAUDE.md` → current modules, exam formats, syllabus if captured - User-provided past exams (PDF, pasted text, paths) - Optional: module guide for the current module (for "what's been covered to date") **If the uploaded past exams have a lecturer's name, use it to match patterns** (same-lecturer exams are the highest-signal input). **If not, match on subject and structure.** Don't ask the user to type in the lecturer's name — use what's in the materials. ## Workflow ### Step 1: Intake - Which module are we forecasting for? - How many past exams from this lecturer are available? - Are they from the same module, or different modules by the same lecturer? - Are any of them the open-book / closed-book / different-format variants, vs. the typical format for your upcoming exam? - Module guide for your current module? If fewer than 3 past exams: flag as thin sample. Pattern inference is weaker. If exams are across different modules: some patterns transfer (question style, policy vs. doctrine ratio); subject-specific patterns don't. ### Step 2: Read each past exam For each past exam: - Format (number of questions, length, time limit, open/closed book, choice offered) - Subject coverage (which topics tested, in what proportion) - Question style (issue-spotter problem question, single-issue deep, policy essay, short-answer, mix) - Fact pattern density (fact-heavy hypos, sparse facts with doctrinal focus, or policy prompts with no facts) - Recurring traps (e.g., lecturer always hides the consideration issue in an otherwise-clean Contracts fact pattern; lecturer always asks about the exception rather than the rule) - Policy vs. doctrine ratio - Whether case names are expected in answers (some UK lecturers mark up for OSCOLA citation accuracy) - Unusual structures (moot scenario, open research exercise, coursework-vs-exam) ### Step 3: Cross-exam pattern analysis Roll up what's consistent across exams: **Stable patterns (appeared in most/all past exams):** - Subject weights (e.g., "offer and acceptance and consideration account for 30% of exam questions consistently") - Question style (e.g., "always one long issue-spotter problem + one policy essay") - Lecturer hobby horses (e.g., "always tests promissory estoppel even when it's a minor topic in class") **Variable patterns (appeared in some but not all):** - Policy essays (e.g., "appeared in 2 of 4 past exams — usually when the semester covered a policy-heavy topic late") - Open-book vs. closed-book differences - Whether questions require specific case citation (OSCOLA) or just rule statements **Absent patterns worth noting:** - Topics covered in class that have NEVER been tested in past exams — don't skip these, but don't weight them heavily either - Topics tested in past exams that aren't in your current syllabus — probably not coming back ### Step 4: Forecast for the upcoming exam **Header — required, first line of the forecast, both in-chat and in the saved file.** Per plugin config `## Outputs`, every study output carries the verbatim study-notes header. The forecast is a study output. Do not omit, rephrase, or relocate the header: ``` STUDY NOTES — NOT LEGAL ADVICE ``` Combine pattern analysis with current syllabus: ```markdown STUDY NOTES — NOT LEGAL ADVICE # Exam Forecast — [module / lecturer] — [date] **Past exams analysed:** [N] **Sample confidence:** [thin (<3) / moderate (3-5) / strong (6+)] **Caveats:** [e.g., "one of the past exams was an open-book resit; your upcoming is closed-book. Pattern transfer is partial."] --- ## Subject weighting (historical) | Topic | Past exam weight (avg) | In current syllabus? | Forecast weight | |---|---|---|---| | [topic 1] | [%] | [yes/partial/no] | [heavier / stable / lighter] | ## Question-style forecast - **Format likely:** [X problem questions + Y essays, or similar; choice of N from M] - **Fact-pattern density:** [fact-heavy / sparse / mixed] - **Call style:** [one broad call / multiple specific calls / bullet sub-parts] - **Citation expected:** [OSCOLA case citation expected in answers / rules only] ## Lecturer hobby horses to watch - [topic A] — appeared in [M of N] past exams. Weighted 3-5x its syllabus share. - [topic B] — [pattern] - [trap pattern] — e.g., "always hides promissory estoppel in an otherwise-clean Contracts question" ## Topics covered this term but rarely tested [list — don't skip, but don't over-weight] ## Study emphasis recommendation Based on past exam patterns AND current syllabus coverage: **Heavy:** [topics likely to anchor the exam — 40-50% of study time] **Moderate:** [supporting topics — 30-40%] **Sanity check:** [topics covered but historically under-represented — 10-20%, just in case] ## [UNCERTAIN — framing] This forecast is derived from [N] past exams. Lecturers vary. Lecturers rotate topics. Topics that were emphasised in past years can be de-emphasised when the syllabus shifts or when a new case is decided. Treat this as a weighting heuristic for study time, not a prediction. The exam will include surprises. ``` ### Step 5: Output location Write to `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/law-student-uk/exam-forecasts/[module]/forecast-[YYYY-MM-DD].md`. Versioned — if the student gets another past exam mid-term, re-run and append. ## Integration - **outline-builder:** forecast weights feed into outline depth decisions — weight depth on heavy topics - **flashcards:** forecast-heavy topics get more cards generated - **bar-prep-questions:** for SQE1 prep modules, exam-forecast can analyse the SRA's published practice papers rather than lecturer-specific past exams - **irac-practice:** use forecast topics as the subject areas for IRAC/CILAC practice hypos ## Close with the next-steps decision tree End with the next-steps decision tree per CLAUDE.md `## Outputs`. Customise the options to what this skill just produced. The tree is the output; the student picks. ## What this skill does not do - **Predict specific questions.** Past exams show patterns; they don't show you tomorrow's prompt. - **Work without past exams.** If you don't have prior exams from this lecturer, the skill can't forecast — it falls back to "here's what the syllabus covers, study that." - **Replace studying everything on the syllabus.** Forecast is weighting, not elimination. Skipping a topic because it's historically under-represented is how students get burned. - **Account for changes you don't know about.** If the lecturer has shifted focus this year (e.g., emphasised a new leading case — say, a new Supreme Court decision — in lectures), the skill doesn't see that unless you tell it. - **Work reliably with 1-2 past exams.** Thin sample. Flag as such.