Subject-Outline Mapping: Every Item Gets an Address

Learning goals

Map every item to exactly one NCBE MBE Subject Matter Outline subtopic.
Run a mapping review that catches off-spec and double-mapped items.
Use the map to report coverage honestly and fill gaps deliberately.

Lesson 1 — One Item, One Address

Every item gets exactly one outline address: subject → subtopic (e.g., Contracts → Formation → Consideration). "Exactly one" is the discipline: an item that maps to two subtopics is testing two things (see Foundations' one-idea rule); an item that maps to none is off-spec and doesn't ship.

Lesson 2 — The Mapping Review

Quarterly, pull ten random items and re-map them blind — without looking at the recorded mapping. Disagreements mean the tested point is muddy, not that the mapper is wrong. Fix the item (sharpen the tested point) rather than the map.

Lesson 3 — Coverage Reporting

The map is what lets you say, truthfully, "this set covers all seven subjects" — and what stops you from saying it when it doesn't. Publish coverage with the set: a simple subject × count table. Students deserve to know what they're drilling.

Lesson 4 — Gap-Driven Writing

The map's emptiest cells choose your next tested points. This is the opposite of writing what you feel like writing — it's writing what the bank needs. Pair with the Topic Trends module's rotation discipline.

Spot-the-flaw drill

(intended key: B)

Fact pattern: A homeowner hires a contractor to build a garage. The contractor uses defective wiring that causes a fire, injuring the homeowner's guest. The guest sues the contractor. Which statement is most accurate?

A. The contractor is strictly liable for the defective wiring B. The guest may recover in negligence if the contractor breached the duty of reasonable care C. The homeowner's contract bars the guest's tort claim D. The guest must sue the homeowner, not the contractor

Flaw: the item straddles Contracts (the homeowner-contractor agreement) and Torts (the

the item straddles Contracts (the homeowner-contractor agreement) and Torts (the guest's negligence claim) — it has no single outline address, and option C invites a contracts analysis the call doesn't ask for.

Correction

Commit to one address. The tested point is negligence duty to foreseeable plaintiffs; the contract facts are window dressing that muddy the mapping. Either cut them or rewrite the item as a contracts item.

Model rewrite

— cold-solve verified: 2/2 (solvers chose B, B). Address: Torts → Negligence → Duty.

Fact pattern: An electrician hired to rewire a house uses wiring he knows is substandard. A fire injures the homeowner's guest. The guest sues the electrician in negligence. Which statement is most accurate?

A. The electrician is strictly liable because wiring is an abnormally dangerous activity B. The guest may recover if the electrician breached the duty of reasonable care owed to foreseeable plaintiffs C. The guest cannot recover because she had no contract with the electrician D. The guest may recover only if the electrician intended the fire

Key: B

Drill key

One address (Torts/Negligence/Duty), one tested point. Both solvers chose B.

Sources

National Conference of Bar Examiners. MBE Subject Matter Outline. (The mapping authority.)
Downing, S. M., & Haladyna, T. M. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of test development. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (On content-validity evidence through systematic mapping.)