The important things to be able to do are to - describe and explain the doctrine; give examples of how it works in practice; and to critically evaluate the claims of Dicey; his supporters and those who have challenged him. This is an important point - describing is a lower level skill; explaining shows that you understand and can communicate that understanding; the use of examples is evidence of your ability to use relevant materials - and again shows a depth of understanding. But "critical evaluation" demonstrates the highest level of thinking. Lawyers need to be able to challenge - putting forward arguments to support a proposition - and anticipating (and responding to) opposing arguments.
