TTT-LS wrote:Does the fact that I was top 1% after 1L year, at a much higher-ranked school and despite doing none of the nonsense you recommend, affect that conclusion?
Not really, if you ever took a basic course on science or logic and understand the difference between necessary and sufficient conditions. If 90% of the people who read as extensively as JazzOne did wind up in the top 1%, and only 15% of the people who took your relaxation approach, then yes we'd have established a correlation. However, I didn't actually allege causation because I pointed out that there's relatively few people who followed that approach. (I didn't even have time to follow it, but I read a few short books while on airplanes and 2-3 on the weekend before law school) I've typically pointed out that nobody has yet to actually study the issue, but there are lots of reasons to think that it would improve performance, but even then the amount of improvement should only be modest. Maybe someone predicted to be at 40th percentile will be in the 50th or 60th percentile. You are misrepresenting my point if you think I am suggesting reading ahead would always result in some sort of outstanding improvement, though to date we've heard a few stories where people who read ahead did extremely well.
That you got good grades and went to a good school without reading ahead ultimately just confirms what we knew all along - many people went to good schools and got good grades without reading ahead. I will be happy to point out to future 0Ls that you got good grades without reading ahead. In fact, I'll post both sides and say which I think has the stronger point.
You provide some very useful advice about jobs and the social aspects of law school, but I have yet to see you seriously discuss this particular issue. Do you think you could lay the evidence out for your position without resorting to some sort of flame war? All I have ever seen you write is that most 2Ls posting here think that reading ahead isn't helpful, and that you got really good grades without reading ahead. But what you need to prove your point is to find that the people who read ahead didn't rank any better than people who spent the summer relaxing, and we need to hear from a large number of people on the issue. A secondary means would be to rely on our understanding of what it means to learn the law and come up with some theoretical basis for why reading ahead shouldn't be effective. Your library probably has a book shelf dedicated to this issue. Don't try to turn it into some sort of internet bragging contest, since nobody will take that seriously, and I do not really care about internet flame wars.