Law school exams are usually "issue-spotting" exams that test your ability to find the legal issues hidden in the facts. Sometimes merely spotting the issues is enough to score well. Other times, the professor has explicitly listed the issues you are to discuss. If there are secondary issues raised in the question you should note them as well. But, each issue should be discussed in a separate IRAC structure.
Determine which rule pertains to the issue and write the rule in a concise and logical manner. Include exceptions to this rule or the minority rule. You can also explain some of the policy reasons other courts have given for the rule. Cite the case or class note the rule comes from, if your professor requires citations. If there are multiple rules that directly pertain to the issue, you should include them. Any rule or aspect of the rule that you discuss in this portion of your answer should be used in your analysis.
This is arguably the most important section in your exam. This is where you showcase your legal reasoning skills by analyzing the given set of facts under the rules of law that pertain to the issue. There are probably multiple ways to assess the facts and you should note as many as you can. Make sure that whatever rule or aspect of the rule mentioned in your rule section is applied below.
Usually, there is no definitive conclusion that can be drawn on how a court will rule on the issue. You can, if your professor requires, come to a general conclusion. For example, "The court will probably rule..." or "It is unlikely Joey can prove intent..." It is less important that you come to the most likely conclusion but you should try include a conclusion for organization.