Wait you're a 1L? Please tell me you're not, and that you have grades and you're not just spouting off.
This is just wrong. While relying entirely upon supplements/ comm outlines is a mistake they can play a large part in your studying/ reading. Many, many students use hornbooks and E&Es and do very well. Don't listen to anyone who makes blanket statements like the above poster.
Now, 0L reading is way more controversial and questionable. But the above poster is just wrong.
Find your own balance and don't be afraid to use supplements/ comm outlines.
Please see:http://www.top-law-schools.com/success- ... chool.html
(NYU Student who heavily relied upon E&E's & hornbooks.)http://www.top-law-schools.com/loyola-study-advice.html
(Arrow who heavily relied upon E&E's & hornbooks.)http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=104810
(My thread & my story at my T1 before I transferred, using E&E's, hornbooks, and comm supps)
I'll clarify one part of my statement but stick to the rest. Hornbooks WON'T necessarily hurt you. But I see hornbooks about as relevant to success as whether or not you decided to take up a musical instrument during that semester.
1) Go to class
3) Take good class notes
4) Make an outline from those class notes
5) Use that outline and do all the practice exams, under real conditions whenever possible
6) You are as prepared as you will ever need to be for a law school exam
So that's awesome that you and Arrow and some other guy did well with using hornbooks, but IMO you took the method that burnt away far more time than required. I mean, my 2L friend only cracked a hornbook once (required reading) and she now she's on the CLS law review and got a biglaw summer job during her 1L summer for $3,333 a week during the recession.
She echoed my sentiments, a professor is testing you on what they teach you, learning new cases, new perspectives, and condensed analysis isn't going to get you anywhere most of the time. Hornbooks are totally fine if you use them like a dictionary, if you are confused about a concept then break it out and look it up, and then put it away.
Getting to Maybe and so many other sources (law profs) agree. You aren't going to really hurt yourself with a hornbook but for FFS you have a class and a casebook for a reason, not so that you can read some other professor's version of your class. I see hornbooks as something that suck up way too much 1L time. People see it as an arm's race and pretty soon if you haven't read the hornbook cover to cover, brief cases for class, and highlighted and marked your book to death, then you might as well drop out now.
It's unhealthy and I think encouraging the mentality of hornbooks being necessary is bad. Students should avoid the hornbook and if their study groups don't clarify class concepts then office hours should. If during office hours you ask/or the professor suggests a hornbook aide then go for it. But I think there's a very good reason that none of my professors ever said "Oh if you are having problems understanding consideration, please just look at Farnsworth's hornbook!"
But I understand there are different approaches, where you lose me though, is through any argument about how comprehensively reading hornbooks gains you anything. Unless you have a class with lots of policy questions or a professor who gives rambling lectures I don't see the benefit, even with policy the professor is looking for you to "play" with the ammo she gave you during class, and that's all you need for an A. HB's would be useful to the extent they help you think of other creative arguments.