I had Broyde for legal methods and he will ask you to argue a position that is contrary to the majority or popular view. Our exam was to dissent from a majority opinion that held that trial courts could be open and conduct trials on Sunday. The key is to dissect the majority's reasons for coming to this conclusion and then come up with a thoery for why it is wrong, usually by going through a point by point rebutal using the "tools" you have learned for statutory interpretation and legal analysis. These include: statutory construction/ plain language of the statute, common law which may or may not have been overruled (i.e. precedent), legislative Intent as determined by legislative history and the history of the ill which the legislature was trying to correct (i.e. what was the problem and what were they likely trying to do about it- and is the issue in this case actually covered?). Also cover policy reasons for your view and agaist the majority view. Make sure that you open by identifying the issue in a consise and clear manner! Reading the examples by Miangle and Myself is the best way to see what an answer should look like. Good luck!